Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation over the human motor cortex on corticospinal and transcallosal excitability.

Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, Queen Square, London, WC1N 3BG, UK.
Experimental Brain Research (Impact Factor: 2.22). 07/2004; 156(4):439-43. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-003-1800-2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Weak transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can induce long lasting changes in cortical excitability. In the present study we asked whether tDCS applied to the left primary motor cortex (M1) also produces aftereffects distant from the site of the stimulating electrodes. We therefore tested corticospinal excitability in the left and the right M1 and transcallosal excitability between the two cortices using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) before and after applying tDCS. Eight healthy subjects received 10 min of anodal or cathodal tDCS (1 mA) to the left M1. We examined the amplitude of contralateral motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and the onset latency and duration of transcallosal inhibition with single pulse TMS. MEPs evoked from the tDCS stimulated (left) M1 were increased by 32% after anodal and decreased by 27% after cathodal tDCS, while transcallosal inhibition evoked from the left M1 remained unchanged. The effect on MEPs evoked from the left M1 lasted longer for cathodal than for anodal tDCS. MEPs evoked from the right M1 were unchanged whilst the duration of transcallosal inhibition evoked from the right M1 was shortened after cathodal tDCS and prolonged after anodal tDCS. The duration of transcallosal inhibition returned to control values before the effect on the MEPs from the left M1 had recovered. These findings are compatible with the idea that tDCS-induced aftereffects in the cortical motor system are limited to the stimulated hemisphere, and that tDCS not only affects corticospinal circuits involved in producing MEPs but also inhibitory interneurons mediating transcallosal inhibition from the contralateral hemisphere.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used as a useful interventional brain stimulation technique to improve unilateral upper-limb motor function in healthy humans, as well as in stroke patients. Although tDCS applications are supposed to modify the interhemispheric balance between the motor cortices, the tDCS after-effects on interhemispheric interactions are still poorly understood. To address this issue, we investigated the tDCS after-effects on interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) between the primary motor cortices (M1) in healthy humans. Three types of tDCS electrode montage were tested on separate days; anodal tDCS over the right M1, cathodal tDCS over the left M1, bilateral tDCS with anode over the right M1 and cathode over the left M1. Single-pulse and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulations were given to the left M1 and right M1 before and after tDCS to assess the bilateral corticospinal excitabilities and mutual direction of IHI. Regardless of the electrode montages, corticospinal excitability was increased on the same side of anodal stimulation and decreased on the same side of cathodal stimulation. However, neither unilateral tDCS changed the corticospinal excitability at the unstimulated side. Unilateral anodal tDCS increased IHI from the facilitated side M1 to the unchanged side M1, but it did not change IHI in the other direction. Unilateral cathodal tDCS suppressed IHI both from the inhibited side M1 to the unchanged side M1 and from the unchanged side M1 to the inhibited side M1. Bilateral tDCS increased IHI from the facilitated side M1 to the inhibited side M1 and attenuated IHI in the opposite direction. Sham-tDCS affected neither corticospinal excitability nor IHI. These findings indicate that tDCS produced polarity-specific after-effects on the interhemispheric interactions between M1 and that those after-effects on interhemispheric interactions were mainly dependent on whether tDCS resulted in the facilitation or inhibition of the M1 sending interhemispheric volleys.
    PLoS ONE 01/2014; 9(12):e114244. · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Women with depression in pregnancy are faced with difficult treatment decisions. Untreated, antenatal depression has serious negative implications for mothers and children. While antidepressant drug treatment is likely to improve depressive symptoms, it crosses the placenta and may pose risks to the unborn child. Transcranial direct current stimulation is a focal brain stimulation treatment that improves depressive symptoms within 3 weeks of treatment by inducing changes to brain areas involved in depression, without impacting any other brain areas, and without inducing changes to heart rate, blood pressure or core body temperature. The localized nature of transcranial direct current stimulation makes it an ideal therapeutic approach for treating depression during pregnancy, although it has never previously been evaluated in this population.Methods/design: We describe a pilot randomized controlled trial of transcranial direct current stimulation among women with depression in pregnancy to assess the feasibility of a larger, multicentre efficacy study. Women over 18 years of age and between 14 and 32 weeks gestation can be enrolled in the study provided they meet diagnostic criteria for a major depressive episode of at least moderate severity and have been offered but refused antidepressant medication. Participants are randomized to receive active transcranial direct current stimulation or a sham condition that is administered in 15 30-minute treatments over three weeks. Women sit upright during treatment and receive obstetrical monitoring prior to, during and after each treatment session. Depressive symptoms, treatment acceptability, and pregnancy outcomes are assessed at baseline (prior to randomization), at the end of each treatment week, every four weeks post-treatment until delivery, and at 4 and 12 weeks postpartum.
    Trials. 09/2014; 15(1):366.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Changes in γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) mediated synaptic transmission have been associated with age-related motor and cognitive functional decline. Since anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (atDCS) has been suggested to target cortical GABAergic inhibitory interneurons, its potential for the treatment of deficient inhibitory activity and functional decline is being increasingly discussed. Therefore, after-effects of a single session of atDCS on resting-state and event-related short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as evaluated with double-pulse TMS and dexterous manual performance were examined using a sham-controlled cross-over design in a sample of older and younger participants. The atDCS effect on resting-state inhibition differed in direction, magnitude, and timing, i.e., late relative release of inhibition in the younger and early relative increase in inhibition in the older. More pronounced release of event-related inhibition after atDCS was exclusively seen in the older. Event-related modulation of inhibition prior to stimulation predicted the magnitude of atDCS-induced effects on resting-state inhibition. Specifically, older participants with high modulatory capacity showed a disinhibitory effect comparable to the younger. Beneficial effects on behavior were mainly seen in the older and in tasks requiring higher dexterity, no clear association with physiological changes was found. Differential effects of atDCS on SICI, discussed to reflect GABAergic inhibition at the level of the primary motor cortex, might be distinct in older and younger participants depending on the functional integrity of the underlying neural network. Older participants with preserved modulatory capacity, i.e., a physiologically "young" motor network, were more likely to show a disinhibitory effect of atDCS. These results favor individually tailored application of tDCS with respect to specific target groups.
    Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience 01/2014; 6:146. · 5.20 Impact Factor