Effects of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on cerebellar-brain inhibition in humans: A systematic evaluation
| Autor: | Dagmar Timmann, Zeynab Rezaee, Michael A. Nitsche, Anirban Dutta, Giorgi Batsikadze, Stefan Herlitze, Dae-In Chang, Marcus Gerwig |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male Cerebellum medicine.medical_treatment Medizin Biophysics 050105 experimental psychology lcsh:RC321-571 Random Allocation Young Adult 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Head model Deltoid muscle Neuroplasticity medicine Humans 0501 psychology and cognitive sciences lcsh:Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry Transcranial direct-current stimulation business.industry General Neuroscience 05 social sciences Healthy subjects Neural Inhibition Cerebellar-brain inhibition Transcranial magnetic stimulation medicine.anatomical_structure Cerebellar cortex Female Transcranial direct current stimulation Neurology (clinical) business human activities Neuroscience 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| Zdroj: | Brain Stimulation, Vol 12, Iss 5, Pp 1177-1186 (2019) |
| ISSN: | 1935-861X |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.brs.2019.04.010 |
| Popis: | Background Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) is increasingly used to modulate cerebellar excitability and plasticity in healthy subjects and various patient populations. ctDCS parameters are poorly standardized, and its physiology remains little understood. Our aim was to compare the physiological effects of three different non-target electrode positions (buccinator muscle, supraorbital region, deltoid muscle). Methods In the first experiment, physiological after-effects of ctDCS were compared based on cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI) in a group of 15 healthy right-handed participants. In the second experiment, CBI after-effects of ctDCS were assessed using different transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) intensities in 14 participants (CBI recruitment curve). The electric field distribution was calculated for each of the electrode montages based on a single anatomically accurate head model. Results Anodal and cathodal ctDCS polarities significantly decreased cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI) with no substantial differences between the montages. Lower cerebellar TMS intensities resulted in decreased CBI following cathodal and increased CBI after anodal ctDCS. Computational modeling revealed minor differences in the electric field distribution between non-target electrode positions based on the effect size. Conclusion Our results show that the non-target electrode position has no significant impact on modeling results and physiological ctDCS after-effects. The recruitment of the cerebellar-M1 connection, however, varied depending on ctDCS polarity and cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity, possibly due to diverse effects on different cell populations in the cerebellar cortex. This may be one of the reasons why ctDCS effects on functional measures are difficult to predict. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect