Non-Invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation Montages for Modulation of Human Motor Function

Non-invasive electrical brain stimulation (NEBS) is used to modulate brain function and behavior, both for research and clinical purposes. In particular, NEBS can be applied transcranially either as direct current stimulation (tDCS) or alternating current stimulation (tACS). These stimulation types exert time-, dose- and in the case of tDCS polarity-specific effects on motor function and skill learning in healthy subjects. Lately, tDCS has been used to augment the therapy of motor disabilities in patients with stroke or movement disorders. This article provides a step-by-step protocol for targeting the primary motor cortex with tDCS and transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), a specific form of tACS using an electrical current applied randomly within a pre-defined frequency range. The setup of two different stimulation montages is explained. In both montages the emitting electrode (the anode for tDCS) is placed on the primary motor cortex of interest. For unilateral motor cortex stimulation the receiving electrode is placed on the contralateral forehead while for bilateral motor cortex stimulation the receiving electrode is placed on the opposite primary motor cortex. The advantages and disadvantages of each montage for the modulation of cortical excitability and motor function including learning are discussed, as well as safety, tolerability and blinding aspects.     

The Use of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy as a Tool for the Measurement of Bi-hemispheric Transcranial Electric Stimulation Effects on Primary Motor Cortex Metabolism

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulation technique that has been increasingly used over the past decade in the treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders such as stroke and depression. Yet, the mechanisms underlying its ability to modulate brain excitability to improve clinical symptoms remains poorly understood ³³. To help improve this understanding, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (¹H-MRS) can be used as it allows the in vivo quantification of brain metabolites such as γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate in a region-specific manner ⁴¹. In fact, a recent study demonstrated that ¹H-MRS is indeed a powerful means to better understand the effects of tDCS on neurotransmitter concentration ³⁴. This article aims to describe the complete protocol for combining tDCS (NeuroConn MR compatible stimulator) with ¹H-MRS at 3 T using a MEGA-PRESS sequence. We will describe the impact of a protocol that has shown great promise for the treatment of motor dysfunctions after stroke, which consists of bilateral stimulation of primary motor cortices ^27,30,31. Methodological factors to consider and possible modifications to the protocol are also discussed.     

Differential Modulation of Corticospinal Excitability by Different Current Densities of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Background

Novel non-invasive brain stimulation techniques such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been developed in recent years. TDCS-induced corticospinal excitability changes depend on two important factors current intensity and stimulation duration. Despite clinical success with existing tDCS parameters, optimal protocols are still not entirely set.

Objective/hypothesis

The current study aimed to investigate the effects of four different anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) current densities on corticospinal excitability.

Methods

Four current intensities of 0.3, 0.7, 1.4 and 2 mA resulting in current densities (CDs) of 0.013, 0.029, 0.058 and 0.083 mA/cm² were applied on twelve right-handed (mean age 34.5±10.32 yrs) healthy individuals in different sessions at least 48 hours apart. a-tDCS was applied continuously for 10 minute, with constant active and reference electrode sizes of 24 and 35 cm² respectively. The corticospinal excitability of the extensor carpi radialis muscle (ECR) was measured before and immediately after the intervention and at 10, 20 and 30 minutes thereafter.

Results

Post hoc comparisons showed significant differences in corticospinal excitability changes for CDs of 0.013 mA/cm² and 0.029 mA/cm² (P = 0.003). There were no significant differences between excitability changes for the 0.013 mA/cm² and 0.058 mA/cm² (P = 0.080) or 0.013 mA/cm² and 0.083 mA/cm² (P = 0.484) conditions.

Conclusion

This study found that a-tDCS with a current density of 0.013 mA/cm² induces significantly larger corticospinal excitability changes than CDs of 0.029 mA/cm². The implication is that might help to avoid applying unwanted amount of current to the cortical areas.     

Focus: Addiction: A Feasibility Study of Bilateral Anodal Stimulation of the Prefrontal Cortex Using High-Definition Electrodes in Healthy Participants

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies often use one anode to increase cortical excitability in one hemisphere. However, mental processes may involve cortical regions in both hemispheres. This study’s aim was to assess the safety and possible effects on affect and working memory of tDCS using two anodes for bifrontal stimulation. A group of healthy subjects participated in two bifrontal tDCS sessions on two different days, one for real and the other for sham stimulation. They performed a working memory task and reported their affect immediately before and after each tDCS session. Relative to sham, real bifrontal stimulation did not induce significant adverse effects, reduced decrement in vigor-activity during the study session, and did not improve working memory. These preliminary findings suggest that bifrontal anodal stimulation is feasible and safe and may reduce task-related fatigue in healthy participants. Its effects on neuropsychiatric patients deserve further study.     

Effects of Sensory Behavioral Tasks on Pain Threshold and Cortical Excitability

Background/Objective

Transcutaneous electrical stimulation has been proven to modulate nervous system activity, leading to changes in pain perception, via the peripheral sensory system, in a bottom up approach. We tested whether different sensory behavioral tasks induce significant effects in pain processing and whether these changes correlate with cortical plasticity.

Methodology/Principal Findings

This randomized parallel designed experiment included forty healthy right-handed males. Three different somatosensory tasks, including learning tasks with and without visual feedback and simple somatosensory input, were tested on pressure pain threshold and motor cortex excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Sensory tasks induced hand-specific pain modulation effects. They increased pain thresholds of the left hand (which was the target to the sensory tasks) and decreased them in the right hand. TMS showed that somatosensory input decreased cortical excitability, as indexed by reduced MEP amplitudes and increased SICI. Although somatosensory tasks similarly altered pain thresholds and cortical excitability, there was no significant correlation between these variables and only the visual feedback task showed significant somatosensory learning.

Conclusions/Significance

Lack of correlation between cortical excitability and pain thresholds and lack of differential effects across tasks, but significant changes in pain thresholds suggest that analgesic effects of somatosensory tasks are not primarily associated with motor cortical neural mechanisms, thus, suggesting that subcortical neural circuits and/or spinal cord are involved with the observed effects. Identifying the neural mechanisms of somatosensory stimulation on pain may open novel possibilities for combining different targeted therapies for pain control.     

Electrical Stimulation over Bilateral Occipito-Temporal Regions Reduces N170 in the Right Hemisphere and the Composite Face Effect

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that can modulate cortical excitability. Although the clinical value of tDCS has been advocated, the potential of tDCS in cognitive rehabilitation of face processing deficits is less understood. Face processing has been associated with the occipito-temporal cortex (OT). The present study investigated whether face processing in healthy adults can be modulated by applying tDCS over the OT. Experiment 1 investigated whether tDCS can affect N170, a face-sensitive ERP component, with a face orientation judgment task. The N170 in the right hemisphere was reduced in active stimulation conditions compared with the sham stimulation condition for both upright faces and inverted faces. Experiment 2 further demonstrated that tDCS can modulate the composite face effect, a type of holistic processing that reflects the obligatory attention to all parts of a face. The composite face effect was reduced in active stimulation conditions compared with the sham stimulation condition. Additionally, the current polarity did not modulate the effect of tDCS in the two experiments. The present study demonstrates that N170 can be causally manipulated by stimulating the OT with weak currents. Furthermore, our study provides evidence that obligatory attention to all parts of a face can be affected by the commonly used tDCS parameter setting.     

Changes in Corticomotor Excitability and Intracortical Inhibition of the Primary Motor Cortex Forearm Area Induced by Anodal tDCS

Objective

Previous studies have investigated how tDCS over the primary motor cortex modulates excitability in the intrinsic hand muscles. Here, we tested if tDCS changes corticomotor excitability and/or cortical inhibition when measured in the extensor carpi radialis (ECR) and if these aftereffects can be successfully assessed during controlled muscle contraction.

Methods

We implemented a double blind cross-over design in which participants (n = 16) completed two sessions where the aftereffects of 20 min of 1 mA (0.04 mA/cm²) anodal vs sham tDCS were tested in a resting muscle, and two more sessions where the aftereffects of anodal vs sham tDCS were tested in an active muscle.

Results

Anodal tDCS increased corticomotor excitability in ECR when aftereffects were measured with a low-level controlled muscle contraction. Furthermore, anodal tDCS decreased short interval intracortical inhibition but only when measured at rest and after non-responders (n = 2) were removed. We found no changes in the cortical silent period.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that targeting more proximal muscles in the upper limb with anodal tDCS is achievable and corticomotor excitability can be assessed in the presence of a low-level controlled contraction of the target muscle.     

Preliminary Evidence That Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Enhances Time to Task Failure of a Sustained Submaximal Contraction

The purpose of this study was to determine whether anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) delivered while performing a sustained submaximal contraction would increase time to task failure (TTF) compared to sham stimulation. Healthy volunteers (n = 18) performed two fatiguing contractions at 20% of maximum strength with the elbow flexors on separate occasions. During fatigue task performance, either anodal or sham stimulation was delivered to the motor cortex for up to 20 minutes. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to assess changes in cortical excitability during stimulation. There was no systematic effect of the anodal tDCS stimulation on TTF for the entire subject set (n = 18; p = 0.64). Accordingly, a posteriori subjects were divided into two tDCS-time groups: Full-Time (n = 8), where TTF occurred prior to the termination of tDCS, and Part-Time (n = 10), where TTF extended after tDCS terminated. The TTF for the Full-Time group was 31% longer with anodal tDCS compared to sham (p = 0.04), whereas TTF for the Part-Time group did not differ (p = 0.81). Therefore, the remainder of our analysis addressed the Full-Time group. With anodal tDCS, the amount of muscle fatigue was 6% greater at task failure (p = 0.05) and the amount of time the Full-Time group performed the task at an RPE between 8–10 (“very hard”) increased by 38% (p = 0.04) compared to sham. There was no difference in measures of cortical excitability between stimulation conditions (p = 0.90). That the targeted delivery of anodal tDCS during task performance both increased TTF and the amount of muscle fatigue in a subset of subjects suggests that augmenting cortical excitability with tDCS enhanced descending drive to the spinal motorpool to recruit more motor units. The results also suggest that the application of tDCS during performance of fatiguing activity has the potential to bolster the capacity to exercise under conditions required to derive benefits due to overload.     

A Protocol for the Use of Remotely-Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in Multiple Sclerosis (MS)

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique that uses low amplitude direct currents to alter cortical excitability. With well-established safety and tolerability, tDCS has been found to have the potential to ameliorate symptoms such as depression and pain in a range of conditions as well as to enhance outcomes of cognitive and physical training. However, effects are cumulative, requiring treatments that can span weeks or months and frequent, repeated visits to the clinic. The cost in terms of time and travel is often prohibitive for many participants, and ultimately limits real-world access. Following guidelines for remote tDCS application, we propose a protocol that would allow remote (in-home) participation that uses specially-designed devices for supervised use with materials modified for patient use, and real-time monitoring through a telemedicine video conferencing platform. We have developed structured training procedures and clear, detailed instructional materials to allow for self- or proxy-administration while supervised remotely in real-time. The protocol is designed to have a series of checkpoints, addressing attendance and tolerability of the session, to be met in order to continue to the next step. The feasibility of this protocol was then piloted for clinical use in an open label study of remotely-supervised tDCS in multiple sclerosis (MS). This protocol can be widely used for clinical study of tDCS.     

Speech facilitation by left inferior frontal cortex stimulation

Electrophysiological studies in humans and animals suggest that noninvasive neurostimulation methods such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can elicit long-lasting [1], polarity-dependent [2] changes in neocortical excitability. Application of tDCS can have significant and selective behavioral consequences that are associated with the cortical location of the stimulation electrodes and the task engaged during stimulation [3-8]. However, the mechanism by which tDCS affects human behavior is unclear. Recently, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been used to determine the spatial topography of tDCS effects [9-13], but no behavioral data were collected during stimulation. The present study is unique in this regard, in that both neural and behavioral responses were recorded using a novel combination of left frontal anodal tDCS during an overt picture-naming fMRI study. We found that tDCS had significant behavioral and regionally specific neural facilitation effects. Furthermore, faster naming responses correlated with decreased blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signal in Broca's area. Our data support the importance of Broca's area within the normal naming network and as such indicate that Broca's area may be a suitable candidate site for tDCS in neurorehabilitation of anomic patients, whose brain damage spares this region.     

Technique and Considerations in the Use of 4x1 Ring High-definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS)

High-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) has recently been developed as a noninvasive brain stimulation approach that increases the accuracy of current delivery to the brain by using arrays of smaller "high-definition" electrodes, instead of the larger pad-electrodes of conventional tDCS. Targeting is achieved by energizing electrodes placed in predetermined configurations. One of these is the 4x1-ring configuration. In this approach, a center ring electrode (anode or cathode) overlying the target cortical region is surrounded by four return electrodes, which help circumscribe the area of stimulation. Delivery of 4x1-ring HD-tDCS is capable of inducing significant neurophysiological and clinical effects in both healthy subjects and patients. Furthermore, its tolerability is supported by studies using intensities as high as 2.0 milliamperes for up to twenty minutes.Even though 4x1 HD-tDCS is simple to perform, correct electrode positioning is important in order to accurately stimulate target cortical regions and exert its neuromodulatory effects. The use of electrodes and hardware that have specifically been tested for HD-tDCS is critical for safety and tolerability. Given that most published studies on 4x1 HD-tDCS have targeted the primary motor cortex (M1), particularly for pain-related outcomes, the purpose of this article is to systematically describe its use for M1 stimulation, as well as the considerations to be taken for safe and effective stimulation. However, the methods outlined here can be adapted for other HD-tDCS configurations and cortical targets.     

Evolution of Premotor Cortical Excitability after Cathodal Inhibition of the Primary Motor Cortex: A Sham-Controlled Serial Navigated TMS Study

Background

Premotor cortical regions (PMC) play an important role in the orchestration of motor function, yet their role in compensatory mechanisms in a disturbed motor system is largely unclear. Previous studies are consistent in describing pronounced anatomical and functional connectivity between the PMC and the primary motor cortex (M1). Lesion studies consistently show compensatory adaptive changes in PMC neural activity following an M1 lesion. Non-invasive brain modification of PMC neural activity has shown compensatory neurophysiological aftereffects in M1. These studies have contributed to our understanding of how M1 responds to changes in PMC neural activity. Yet, the way in which the PMC responds to artificial inhibition of M1 neural activity is unclear. Here we investigate the neurophysiological consequences in the PMC and the behavioral consequences for motor performance of stimulation mediated M1 inhibition by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

Purpose

The primary goal was to determine how electrophysiological measures of PMC excitability change in order to compensate for inhibited M1 neural excitability and attenuated motor performance.

Hypothesis

Cathodal inhibition of M1 excitability leads to a compensatory increase of ipsilateral PMC excitability.

Methods

We enrolled 16 healthy participants in this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, crossover design study. All participants underwent navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) to identify PMC and M1 corticospinal projections as well as to evaluate electrophysiological measures of cortical, intracortical and interhemispheric excitability. Cortical M1 excitability was inhibited using cathodal tDCS. Finger-tapping speeds were used to examine motor function.

Results

Cathodal tDCS successfully reduced M1 excitability and motor performance speed. PMC excitability was increased for longer and was the only significant predictor of motor performance.

Conclusion

The PMC compensates for attenuated M1 excitability and contributes to motor performance maintenance.     

Polarity Specific Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Interhemispheric Inhibition

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.     

Building up Analgesia in Humans via the Endogenous μ-Opioid System by Combining Placebo and Active tDCS: A Preliminary Report

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a method of non-invasive brain stimulation that has been frequently used in experimental and clinical pain studies. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying tDCS-mediated pain control, and most important its placebo component, are not completely established. In this pilot study, we investigated in vivo the involvement of the endogenous μ-opioid system in the global tDCS-analgesia experience. Nine healthy volunteers went through positron emission tomography (PET) scans with [¹¹C]carfentanil, a selective μ-opioid receptor (MOR) radiotracer, to measure the central MOR activity during tDCS in vivo (non-displaceable binding potential, BP_ND) - one of the main analgesic mechanisms in the brain. Placebo and real anodal primary motor cortex (M1/2mA) tDCS were delivered sequentially for 20 minutes each during the PET scan. The initial placebo tDCS phase induced a decrease in MOR BP_ND in the periaqueductal gray matter (PAG), precuneus, and thalamus, indicating activation of endogenous μ-opioid neurotransmission, even before the active tDCS. The subsequent real tDCS also induced MOR activation in the PAG and precuneus, which were positively correlated to the changes observed with placebo tDCS. Nonetheless, real tDCS had an additional MOR activation in the left prefrontal cortex. Although significant changes in the MOR BP_ND occurred with both placebo and real tDCS, significant analgesic effects, measured by improvements in the heat and cold pain thresholds, were only observed after real tDCS, not the placebo tDCS. This study gives preliminary evidence that the analgesic effects reported with M1-tDCS, can be in part related to the recruitment of the same endogenous MOR mechanisms induced by placebo, and that such effects can be purposely optimized by real tDCS.     

Multi-Session Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Elicits Inflammatory and Regenerative Processes in the Rat Brain

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is increasingly being used in human studies as an adjuvant tool to promote recovery of function after stroke. However, its neurobiological effects are still largely unknown. Electric fields are known to influence the migration of various cell types in vitro, but effects in vivo remain to be shown. Hypothesizing that tDCS might elicit the recruitment of cells to the cortex, we here studied the effects of tDCS in the rat brain in vivo. Adult Wistar rats (n = 16) were randomized to either anodal or cathodal stimulation for either 5 or 10 consecutive days (500 µA, 15 min). Bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) was given systemically to label dividing cells throughout the experiment. Immunohistochemical analyses ex vivo included stainings for activated microglia and endogenous neural stem cells (NSC). Multi-session tDCS with the chosen parameters did not cause a cortical lesion. An innate immune response with early upregulation of Iba1-positive activated microglia occurred after both cathodal and anodal tDCS. The involvement of adaptive immunity as assessed by ICAM1-immunoreactivity was less pronounced. Most interestingly, only cathodal tDCS increased the number of endogenous NSC in the stimulated cortex. After 10 days of cathodal stimulation, proliferating NSC increased by ∼60%, with a significant effect of both polarity and number of tDCS sessions on the recruitment of NSC. We demonstrate a pro-inflammatory effect of both cathodal and anodal tDCS, and a polarity-specific migratory effect on endogenous NSC in vivo. Our data suggest that tDCS in human stroke patients might also elicit NSC activation and modulate neuroinflammation.     

How Does Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Pain Neuromatrix Affect Brain Excitability and Pain Perception? A Randomised,Double-Blind,Sham-Control Study

Background

Integration of information between multiple cortical regions of the pain neuromatrix is thought to underpin pain modulation. Although altered processing in the primary motor (M1) and sensory (S1) cortices is implicated in separate studies, the simultaneous changes in and the relationship between these regions are unknown yet. The primary aim was to assess the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) over superficial regions of the pain neuromatrix on M1 and S1 excitability. The secondary aim was to investigate how M1 and S1 excitability changes affect sensory (STh) and pain thresholds (PTh).

Methods

Twelve healthy participants received 20 min a-tDCS under five different conditions including a-tDCS of M1, a-tDCS of S1, a-tDCS of DLPFC, sham a-tDCS, and no-tDCS. Excitability of dominant M1 and S1 were measured before, immediately, and 30 minutes after intervention respectively. Moreover, STh and PTh to peripheral electrical and mechanical stimulation were evaluated. All outcome measures were assessed at three time-points of measurement by a blind rater.

Results

A-tDCS of M1 and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) significantly increased brain excitability in M1 (p < 0.05) for at least 30 min. Following application of a-tDCS over the S1, the amplitude of the N20-P25 component of SEPs increased immediately after the stimulation (p < 0.05), whilst M1 stimulation decreased it. Compared to baseline values, significant STh and PTh increase was observed after a-tDCS of all three stimulated areas. Except in M1 stimulation, there was significant PTh difference between a-tDCS and sham tDCS.

Conclusion

a-tDCS of M1 is the best spots to enhance brain excitability than a-tDCS of S1 and DLPFC. Surprisingly, a-tDCS of M1 and S1 has diverse effects on S1 and M1 excitability. A-tDCS of M1, S1, and DLPFC increased STh and PTh levels. Given the placebo effects of a-tDCS of M1 in pain perception, our results should be interpreted with caution, particularly with respect to the behavioural aspects of pain modulation.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials, ACTRN12614000817640, http://www.anzctr.org.au/.     

Impact of Anodal and Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation over the Left Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex during Attention Bias Modification: An Eye-Tracking Study

People with anxiety disorders show an attentional bias for threat (AB), and Attention Bias Modification (ABM) procedures have been found to reduce this bias. However, the underlying processes accounting for this effect remain poorly understood. One explanation suggests that ABM requires the modification of attention control, driven by the recruitment of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). In the present double-blind study, we examined whether modifying left DLPFC activation influences the effect of ABM on AB. We used transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to directly modulate cortical excitability of the left DLPFC during an ABM procedure designed to reduce AB to threat. Anodal tDCS increases excitability, whereas cathodal tDCS decreases it. We randomly assigned highly trait-anxious individuals to one of three conditions: 1) ABM combined with cathodal tDCS, 2) ABM combined with anodal tDCS, or 3) ABM combined with sham tDCS. We assessed the effects of these manipulations on both reaction times and eye-movements on a task indexing AB. Results indicate that combining ABM and anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC reduces the total duration that participants’ gaze remains fixated on threat, as assessed using eye-tracking measurement. However, in contrast to previous studies, there were no changes in AB from baseline to post-training for participants that received ABM without tDCS. As the tendency to maintain attention to threat is known to play an important role in the maintenance of anxiety, the present findings suggest that anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC may be considered as a promising tool to reduce the maintenance of gaze to threat. Implications for future translational research combining ABM and tDCS are discussed.     

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on balance improvement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a promising therapeutic tool to improve balance and optimize rehabilitation strategies. However, current literature shows the methodological heterogeneity of tDCS protocols and results, hindering any clear conclusions about the effects of tDCS on postural control.

Objective: Evaluate the effectiveness of tDCS on postural control, and identify the most beneficial target brain areas and the effect on different populations.

Methods: Two independent reviewers selected randomized tDCS clinical-trials studies from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and reference lists of retrieved articles published between 1998 and 2017. Most frequently reported centre of pressure (COP) variables were selected for meta-analysis. Other postural control outcomes were discussed in the review.

Results: Thirty studies were included in the systematic review, and 11 were submitted to a meta-analysis. A reduction of COP displacement area has been significantly achieved by tDCS, evidencing an improvement in balance control. Individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) and healthy young adults are mostly affected by stimulation. The analysis of the impact of tDCS over different brain areas revealed a significant effect after primary motor cortex (M1) stimulation, however, with no clear results after cerebellar stimulation due to divergent results among studies.

Conclusions: tDCS appears to improve balance control, more evident in healthy and CP subjects. Effects are observed when primary MI is stimulated. Cerebellar stimulation should be better investigated.