Literature DB >> 31926812

A novel tDCS sham approach based on model-driven controlled shunting.

Francesco Neri1, Lucia Mencarelli1, Arianna Menardi1, Fabio Giovannelli2, Simone Rossi3, Giulia Sprugnoli4, Alessandro Rossi5, Alvaro Pascual-Leone6, Ricardo Salvador7, Giulio Ruffini7, Emiliano Santarnecchi8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique able to transiently modulate brain activity, is surging as one of the most promising therapeutic solutions in many neurological and psychiatric disorders. However, profound limitations exist in current placebo (sham) protocols that limit single- and double-blinding, especially in non-naïve subjects.
OBJECTIVE: To ensure better blinding and strengthen reliability of tDCS studies and trials, we tested a new optimization algorithm aimed at creating an "active" sham tDCS condition (ActiSham hereafter) capable of inducing the same scalp sensations perceived during real stimulation while preventing currents from reaching the cortex and cause changes in brain excitability.
METHODS: A novel model-based multielectrode technique - optimizing the location and currents of a set of small electrodes placed on the scalp - was used to control the relative amount of current delivered transcranially in real and placebo multichannel tDCS conditions. The presence, intensity and localization of scalp sensations during tDCS was evaluated by means of a specifically designed questionnaire administered to the participants. We compared blinding ratings by directly addressing subjects' ability to discriminate across conditions for both traditional (Bifocal-tDCS and Sham, using sponge electrodes) and our novel multifocal approach (both real Multifocal-tDCS and ActiSham). Changes in corticospinal excitability were monitored based on Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) recorded via concurrent Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and electromyography (EMG).
RESULTS: Participants perceived Multifocal-tDCS and ActiSham similarly in terms of both localization and intensity of scalp sensations, whereas traditional Bifocal stimulation was rated as more painful and annoying compared to its Sham counterpart. Additionally, differences in scalp localization were reported for active/sham Bifocal-tDCS, with Sham tDCS inducing more widespread itching and burning sensations. As for MEPs amplitude, a main effect of stimulation was found when comparing Bifocal-Sham and ActiSham (F(1,13) = 6.67, p = .023), with higher MEPs amplitudes after the application of Bifocal-Sham.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to traditional Bifocal-tDCS, ActiSham offers better participants' blinding by inducing very similar scalp sensations to those of real Multifocal tDCS both in terms of intensity and localization, while not affecting corticospinal excitability.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blinding; Neuromodulation; Placebo; Sham; Transcranial direct current stimulation; tDCS

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31926812     DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2019.11.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Stimul        ISSN: 1876-4754            Impact factor:   8.955


  15 in total

1.  Discernible effects of tDCS over the primary motor and posterior parietal cortex on different stages of motor learning.

Authors:  Guadalupe Nathzidy Rivera-Urbina; Andrés Molero-Chamizo; Michael A Nitsche
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 3.270

Review 2.  Non-invasive brain stimulation and neuroenhancement.

Authors:  Andrea Antal; Bruce Luber; Anna-Katharine Brem; Marom Bikson; Andre R Brunoni; Roi Cohen Kadosh; Veljko Dubljević; Shirley Fecteau; Florinda Ferreri; Agnes Flöel; Mark Hallett; Roy H Hamilton; Christoph S Herrmann; Michal Lavidor; Collen Loo; Caroline Lustenberger; Sergio Machado; Carlo Miniussi; Vera Moliadze; Michael A Nitsche; Simone Rossi; Paolo M Rossini; Emiliano Santarnecchi; Margitta Seeck; Gregor Thut; Zsolt Turi; Yoshikazu Ugawa; Ganesan Venkatasubramanian; Nicole Wenderoth; Anna Wexler; Ulf Ziemann; Walter Paulus
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol Pract       Date:  2022-05-25

3.  High-definition transcranial infraslow pink noise stimulation for chronic low back pain: protocol for a pilot, safety and feasibility randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  Divya Bharatkumar Adhia; Ramakrishnan Mani; John N J Reynolds; Sven Vanneste; Dirk De Ridder
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.006

4.  Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) in the primary motor cortex and its effects on sensorimotor function: a quasi-experimental single-blind sham-controlled trial.

Authors:  Sergio Lerma-Lara; Marina De Cherade Montbron; Mathias Guérin; Ferran Cuenca-Martínez; Roy La Touche
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Modulating Cognitive-Motor Multitasking with Commercial-off-the-Shelf Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation.

Authors:  Nathan Ward; Erika Hussey; Thomas Wooten; Elizabeth Marfeo; Tad T Brunyé
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2022-01-29

6.  Targeted tDCS Mitigates Dual-Task Costs to Gait and Balance in Older Adults.

Authors:  Junhong Zhou; Brad Manor; Wanting Yu; On-Yee Lo; Natalia Gouskova; Ricardo Salvador; Racheli Katz; Pablo Cornejo Thumm; Marina Brozgol; Giulio Ruffini; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Lewis A Lipsitz; Jeffrey M Hausdorff
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 11.274

Review 7.  Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines.

Authors:  Simone Rossi; Andrea Antal; Sven Bestmann; Marom Bikson; Carmen Brewer; Jürgen Brockmöller; Linda L Carpenter; Massimo Cincotta; Robert Chen; Jeff D Daskalakis; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Michael D Fox; Mark S George; Donald Gilbert; Vasilios K Kimiskidis; Giacomo Koch; Risto J Ilmoniemi; Jean Pascal Lefaucheur; Letizia Leocani; Sarah H Lisanby; Carlo Miniussi; Frank Padberg; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Walter Paulus; Angel V Peterchev; Angelo Quartarone; Alexander Rotenberg; John Rothwell; Paolo M Rossini; Emiliano Santarnecchi; Mouhsin M Shafi; Hartwig R Siebner; Yoshikatzu Ugawa; Eric M Wassermann; Abraham Zangen; Ulf Ziemann; Mark Hallett
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-10-24       Impact factor: 4.861

8.  Is the "end-of-study guess" a valid measure of sham blinding during transcranial direct current stimulation?

Authors:  Christopher Turner; Catherine Jackson; Gemma Learmonth
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 3.386

9.  Acute effect of high-definition and conventional tDCS on exercise performance and psychophysiological responses in endurance athletes: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Daniel Gomes da Silva Machado; Marom Bikson; Abhishek Datta; Egas Caparelli-Dáquer; Gozde Unal; Abrahão F Baptista; Edilson Serpeloni Cyrino; Li Min Li; Edgard Morya; Alexandre Moreira; Alexandre Hideki Okano
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Blinding in tDCS Studies: Correct End-of-Study Guess Does Not Moderate the Effects on Associative and Working Memory.

Authors:  Marija Stanković; Marko Živanović; Jovana Bjekić; Saša R Filipović
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-12-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.