Literature DB >> 31482197

Efficacy of tRNS and 140 Hz tACS on motor cortex excitability seemingly dependent on sensitivity to sham stimulation.

Viktoria Kortuem1, Navah Ester Kadish1, Michael Siniatchkin1,2, Vera Moliadze3.   

Abstract

This study investigates the effect of corticospinal excitability during sham stimulation on the individual response to transcranial non-invasive brain stimulation (tNIBS). Thirty healthy young adults aged 24.2 ± 2.8 S.D. participated in the study. Sham, as well as 1 mA of tRNS and 140 Hz tACS stimulation were applied for 10 min each at different sessions. The effect of each stimulation type was quantified by recording TMS-induced, motor evoked potentials (MEPs) before (baseline) and at fixed time points after stimulation (T0, T30, T60 min.). According to the individual response to sham stimulation at T0 in comparison to baseline MEPs, subjects were regarded as responder or non-responder to sham. Following, MEPs at T0, T30 and T60 after verum or sham stimulation were assessed with a repeated measures ANOVA with the within-subject factor stimulation (sham, tRNS, 140 Hz tACS) and the between-subjects factor group (responder vs non-responder). We found that individuals who did not show immediately changes in excitability in sham stimulation sessions were the ones who responded to active stimulation conditions. On the other hand, individuals who responded to sham condition, by either increases or decreases in MEPS, did not respond to active verum stimulation. This result suggests that the presence or lack of responses to sham stimulation can provide a marker for how individuals will respond to tRNS/tACS and thus provide an explanation for the variability in interindividual response. The results of this study draw attention to the general reactivity of the brain, which can be taken into account when planning future studies using tNIBS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  140 tACS; MEP; Plasticity; Sham stimulation; tRNS

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31482197     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-019-05640-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  64 in total

1.  Towards unravelling task-related modulations of neuroplastic changes induced in the human motor cortex.

Authors:  Andrea Antal; Daniella Terney; Csaba Poreisz; Walter Paulus
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2007-10-26       Impact factor: 3.386

2.  Response variability of different anodal transcranial direct current stimulation intensities across multiple sessions.

Authors:  Claudia Ammann; Martin A Lindquist; Pablo A Celnik
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 8.955

3.  Transcranial alternating current stimulation modulates spontaneous low frequency fluctuations as measured with fMRI.

Authors:  Yuranny Cabral-Calderin; Kathleen A Williams; Alexander Opitz; Peter Dechent; Melanie Wilke
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Theory for the development of neuron selectivity: orientation specificity and binocular interaction in visual cortex.

Authors:  E L Bienenstock; L N Cooper; P W Munro
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene polymorphisms shape cortical plasticity in humans.

Authors:  Andrea Antal; Leila Chaieb; Vera Moliadze; Katia Monte-Silva; Csaba Poreisz; Nivethida Thirugnanasambandam; Michael A Nitsche; Moneef Shoukier; Harald Ludwig; Walter Paulus
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2010-01-14       Impact factor: 8.955

6.  Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans.

Authors:  G Batsikadze; V Moliadze; W Paulus; M-F Kuo; M A Nitsche
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 5.182

Review 7.  Transcranial Alternating Current and Random Noise Stimulation: Possible Mechanisms.

Authors:  Andrea Antal; Christoph S Herrmann
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 3.599

8.  No Modulatory Effects when Stimulating the Right Inferior Frontal Gyrus with Continuous 6 Hz tACS and tRNS on Response Inhibition: A Behavioral Study.

Authors:  Hannah Brauer; Navah Ester Kadish; Anya Pedersen; Michael Siniatchkin; Vera Moliadze
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 3.599

9.  Is transcranial alternating current stimulation effective in modulating brain oscillations?

Authors:  Debora Brignani; Manuela Ruzzoli; Piercarlo Mauri; Carlo Miniussi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Bi-frontal transcranial alternating current stimulation in the ripple range reduced overnight forgetting.

Authors:  Géza Gergely Ambrus; Alberto Pisoni; Annika Primaßin; Zsolt Turi; Walter Paulus; Andrea Antal
Journal:  Front Cell Neurosci       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 5.505

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation Modulates Neural Processing of Sensory and Motor Circuits, from Potential Cellular Mechanisms to Behavior: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Weronika Potok; Onno van der Groen; Marc Bächinger; Dylan Edwards; Nicole Wenderoth
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2022-01-07

2.  The Effects of 1 mA tACS and tRNS on Children/Adolescents and Adults: Investigating Age and Sensitivity to Sham Stimulation.

Authors:  Maike Splittgerber; Jan Hendrik Suwelack; Navah Ester Kadish; Vera Moliadze
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 3.599

3.  Comparative study of motor cortical excitability changes following anodal tDCS or high-frequency tRNS in relation to stimulation duration.

Authors:  Jan Haeckert; Christoph Lasser; Benjamin Pross; Alkomiet Hasan; Wolfgang Strube
Journal:  Physiol Rep       Date:  2020-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.