Literature DB >> 27066987

A network approach for modulating memory processes via direct and indirect brain stimulation: Toward a causal approach for the neural basis of memory.

Kamin Kim1, Arne D Ekstrom2, Nitin Tandon3.   

Abstract

Electrical stimulation of the brain is a unique tool to perturb endogenous neural signals, allowing us to evaluate the necessity of given neural processes to cognitive processing. An important issue, gaining increasing interest in the literature, is whether and how stimulation can be employed to selectively improve or disrupt declarative memory processes. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of both invasive and non-invasive stimulation studies aimed at modulating memory performance. The majority of past studies suggest that invasive stimulation of the hippocampus impairs memory performance; similarly, most non-invasive studies show that disrupting frontal or parietal regions also impairs memory performance, suggesting that these regions also play necessary roles in declarative memory. On the other hand, a handful of both invasive and non-invasive studies have also suggested modest improvements in memory performance following stimulation. These studies typically target brain regions connected to the hippocampus or other memory "hubs," which may affect endogenous activity in connected areas like the hippocampus, suggesting that to augment declarative memory, altering the broader endogenous memory network activity is critical. Together, studies reporting memory improvements/impairments are consistent with the idea that a network of distinct brain "hubs" may be crucial for successful memory encoding and retrieval rather than a single primary hub such as the hippocampus. Thus, it is important to consider neurostimulation from the network perspective, rather than from a purely localizationalist viewpoint. We conclude by proposing a novel approach to neurostimulation for declarative memory modulation that aims to facilitate interactions between multiple brain "nodes" underlying memory rather than considering individual brain regions in isolation.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Keywords:  Brain stimulation; DBS; Memory; Network; TMS; tDCS

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27066987     DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2016.04.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem        ISSN: 1074-7427            Impact factor:   2.877


  32 in total

Review 1.  How to optimize knowledge construction in the brain.

Authors:  Marlieke Tina Renée van Kesteren; Martijn Meeter
Journal:  NPJ Sci Learn       Date:  2020-05-01

Review 2.  Deep brain stimulation for the treatment of disorders of consciousness and cognition in traumatic brain injury patients: a review.

Authors:  Bornali Kundu; Andrea A Brock; Dario J Englot; Christopher R Butson; John D Rolston
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 4.047

3.  Low-frequency direct cortical stimulation of left superior frontal gyrus enhances working memory performance.

Authors:  Sankaraleengam Alagapan; Caroline Lustenberger; Eldad Hadar; Hae Won Shin; Flavio Frӧhlich
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-09-27       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Cerebellar Theta and Beta Noninvasive Stimulation Rhythms Differentially Influence Episodic Memory versus Semantic Prediction.

Authors:  Shruti Dave; Stephen VanHaerents; Joel L Voss
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  The effects of direct brain stimulation in humans depend on frequency, amplitude, and white-matter proximity.

Authors:  Uma R Mohan; Andrew J Watrous; Jonathan F Miller; Bradley C Lega; Michael R Sperling; Gregory A Worrell; Robert E Gross; Kareem A Zaghloul; Barbara C Jobst; Kathryn A Davis; Sameer A Sheth; Joel M Stein; Sandhitsu R Das; Richard Gorniak; Paul A Wanda; Daniel S Rizzuto; Michael J Kahana; Joshua Jacobs
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 8.955

Review 6.  Interacting networks of brain regions underlie human spatial navigation: a review and novel synthesis of the literature.

Authors:  Arne D Ekstrom; Derek J Huffman; Michael Starrett
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Closed-loop intracranial stimulation alters movement timing in humans.

Authors:  Bartlett D Moore; Adam R Aron; Nitin Tandon
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 8.955

8.  Network-based brain stimulation selectively impairs spatial retrieval.

Authors:  Kamin Kim; Amber Schedlbauer; Matthew Rollo; Suganya Karunakaran; Arne D Ekstrom; Nitin Tandon
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 8.955

9.  Similar patterns of neural activity predict memory function during encoding and retrieval.

Authors:  James E Kragel; Youssef Ezzyat; Michael R Sperling; Richard Gorniak; Gregory A Worrell; Brent M Berry; Cory Inman; Jui-Jui Lin; Kathryn A Davis; Sandhitsu R Das; Joel M Stein; Barbara C Jobst; Kareem A Zaghloul; Sameer A Sheth; Daniel S Rizzuto; Michael J Kahana
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-04-02       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Frequency-specific noninvasive modulation of memory retrieval and its relationship with hippocampal network connectivity.

Authors:  Molly S Hermiller; Stephen VanHaerents; Tommi Raij; Joel L Voss
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 3.899

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.