Katherine R Naish1, Lana Vedelago2, James MacKillop3, Michael Amlung4. 1. Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University, 100 West 5th Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 3R2, Canada. Electronic address: naishek@mcmaster.ca. 2. Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University, 100 West 5th Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 3R2, Canada. Electronic address: lvedelag@stjosham.on.ca. 3. Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, Michael G. DeGroote Centre for Medicinal Cannabis Research, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University, 100 West 5th Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 3R2, Canada. Electronic address: jmackill@mcmaster.ca. 4. Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, Michael G. DeGroote Centre for Medicinal Cannabis Research, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University, 100 West 5th Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 3R2, Canada. Electronic address: amlungm@mcmaster.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in non-invasive brain stimulation techniques as treatments for addictive disorders. While multiple reviews have examined the effects of neuromodulation on craving and consumption, there has been no review of how neuromodulation affects cognitive functioning in addiction. This systematic review examined studies of the cognitive effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in individuals exhibiting addictive behavior. METHODS: Articles were identified through searches in PubMed and PsycINFO conducted in October 2017. Eligible studies investigated the effects of tDCS or TMS on cognitive task performance in participants reporting substance use (e.g., alcohol, tobacco, or drugs) or addictive behaviors (e.g., gambling). Tasks were organized into five domains: (1) Inhibitory control, (2) Risk-taking, (3) Impulsive choice (delay discounting), (4) Executive function, and (5) Implicit biases. RESULTS: Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven percent of studies used tDCS and 43% used TMS, with nearly all studies (96%) targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Ten studies reported significant within-subject modulation of cognitive functioning associated with active TMS or tDCS, with the same number reporting no change in cognitive performance. Of four studies that included both an experimental and control participant group, three showed between-group differences in the effects of neuromodulation. CONCLUSIONS: While positive effects in several studies suggest that tDCS and TMS improve cognitive functioning in addiction, there is substantial heterogeneity across studies. We discuss person-related and methodological factors that could explain inconsistencies, and propose individualized stimulation protocols may sharpen the cognitive effects of neuromodulation in addiction.
BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in non-invasive brain stimulation techniques as treatments for addictive disorders. While multiple reviews have examined the effects of neuromodulation on craving and consumption, there has been no review of how neuromodulation affects cognitive functioning in addiction. This systematic review examined studies of the cognitive effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in individuals exhibiting addictive behavior. METHODS: Articles were identified through searches in PubMed and PsycINFO conducted in October 2017. Eligible studies investigated the effects of tDCS or TMS on cognitive task performance in participants reporting substance use (e.g., alcohol, tobacco, or drugs) or addictive behaviors (e.g., gambling). Tasks were organized into five domains: (1) Inhibitory control, (2) Risk-taking, (3) Impulsive choice (delay discounting), (4) Executive function, and (5) Implicit biases. RESULTS: Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven percent of studies used tDCS and 43% used TMS, with nearly all studies (96%) targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Ten studies reported significant within-subject modulation of cognitive functioning associated with active TMS or tDCS, with the same number reporting no change in cognitive performance. Of four studies that included both an experimental and control participant group, three showed between-group differences in the effects of neuromodulation. CONCLUSIONS: While positive effects in several studies suggest that tDCS and TMS improve cognitive functioning in addiction, there is substantial heterogeneity across studies. We discuss person-related and methodological factors that could explain inconsistencies, and propose individualized stimulation protocols may sharpen the cognitive effects of neuromodulation in addiction.
Authors: F A Kozel; Z Nahas; C deBrux; M Molloy; J P Lorberbaum; D Bohning; S C Risch; M S George Journal: J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2000 Impact factor: 2.198
Authors: Katie Witkiewitz; Elena R Stein; Victoria R Votaw; Adam D Wilson; Corey R Roos; Stevi J Gallegos; Vincent P Clark; Eric D Claus Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Hamed Ekhtiari; Hosna Tavakoli; Giovanni Addolorato; Chris Baeken; Antonello Bonci; Salvatore Campanella; Luis Castelo-Branco; Gaëlle Challet-Bouju; Vincent P Clark; Eric Claus; Pinhas N Dannon; Alessandra Del Felice; Tess den Uyl; Marco Diana; Massimo di Giannantonio; John R Fedota; Paul Fitzgerald; Luigi Gallimberti; Marie Grall-Bronnec; Sarah C Herremans; Martin J Herrmann; Asif Jamil; Eman Khedr; Christos Kouimtsidis; Karolina Kozak; Evgeny Krupitsky; Claus Lamm; William V Lechner; Graziella Madeo; Nastaran Malmir; Giovanni Martinotti; William M McDonald; Chiara Montemitro; Ester M Nakamura-Palacios; Mohammad Nasehi; Xavier Noël; Masoud Nosratabadi; Martin Paulus; Mauro Pettorruso; Basant Pradhan; Samir K Praharaj; Haley Rafferty; Gregory Sahlem; Betty Jo Salmeron; Anne Sauvaget; Renée S Schluter; Carmen Sergiou; Alireza Shahbabaie; Christine Sheffer; Primavera A Spagnolo; Vaughn R Steele; Ti-Fei Yuan; Josanne D M van Dongen; Vincent Van Waes; Ganesan Venkatasubramanian; Antonio Verdejo-García; Ilse Verveer; Justine W Welsh; Michael J Wesley; Katie Witkiewitz; Fatemeh Yavari; Mohammad-Reza Zarrindast; Laurie Zawertailo; Xiaochu Zhang; Yoon-Hee Cha; Tony P George; Flavio Frohlich; Anna E Goudriaan; Shirley Fecteau; Stacey B Daughters; Elliot A Stein; Felipe Fregni; Michael A Nitsche; Abraham Zangen; Marom Bikson; Colleen A Hanlon Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Jeremy Harper; Stephen M Malone; Sylia Wilson; Ruskin H Hunt; Kathleen M Thomas; William G Iacono Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 13.382