Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on decision making and cognitive flexibility in gambling disorder

Soyata, Ahmet Zihni; Aksu, Serkan; Woods, Adam J.; İşçen, Pınar; Saçar, Kardelen Türkü; Karamürsel, Saçit

doi:10.1007/s00406-018-0948-5

Cited by 49 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A growing body of evidence demonstrates that 2 mA produces a net increase in excitability under the anode and cathode electrodes (Batsikadze et al, 2013;Mosayebi et al, 2019;Nissim et al, 2019). We chose this montage to elicit excitability under both the anode and cathode electrodes which is supported by prior behavioral and connectivity findings with tDCS using this same montage (Nissim et al, 2019;Soyata et al, 2019). Figure 2 demonstrates a computational model of expected current flow for the bilateral frontal montage that was used in this study.…”

Section: Tdcs Parameters and Applicationmentioning

confidence: 81%

Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Paired With Cognitive Training on Functional Connectivity of the Working Memory Network in Older Adults

Nissim

O’Shea

Indahlastari

et al. 2019

Front. Aging Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Working memory, a fundamental short-term cognitive process, is known to decline with advanced age even in healthy older adults. Normal agerelated declines in working memory can cause loss of independence and decreased quality of life. Cognitive training has shown some potential at enhancing certain cognitive processes, although, enhancements are variable. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a form of non-invasive brain stimulation, has shown promise at enhancing working memory abilities, and may further the benefits from cognitive training interventions. However, the neural mechanisms underlying tDCS brain-based enhancements remain unknown. Objective/Hypothesis: Assess the effects of a 2-week intervention of active-tDCS vs. sham paired with cognitive training on functional connectivity of the working memory network during an N-Back working memory task. Methods: Healthy older adults (N = 28; mean age = 74 ± 7.3) completed 10-sessions of cognitive training paired with active or sham-tDCS. Functional connectivity was evaluated at baseline and post-intervention during an N-Back task (2-Back vs. 0-Back). Results: Active-tDCS vs. sham demonstrated a significant increase in connectivity between the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and right inferior parietal lobule at postintervention during 2-Back. Target accuracy on 2-Back was significantly improved for active vs. sham at post-intervention. Conclusion: These results suggest pairing tDCS with cognitive training enhances functional connectivity and working memory performance in older adults, and thus may hold promise as a method for remediating age-related cognitive decline. Future studies evaluating optimal dose and long-term effects of tDCS on brain function will help to maximize potential clinical impacts of tDCS paired with cognitive training in older adults.

show abstract

Section: Tdcs Parameters and Applicationmentioning

confidence: 81%

Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Paired With Cognitive Training on Functional Connectivity of the Working Memory Network in Older Adults

Nissim

O’Shea

Indahlastari

et al. 2019

Front. Aging Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Soyata et al ( 2019 ) reported that three sessions of active anodal t-DCS on the right DLPFC and cathodal t-DCS on the left DLPFC modulated decision making and cognitive flexibility, leading to more advantageous choices during the Iowa Gambling Task and better performances at the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in participants with GD.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notably, one controlled (Sauvaget et al, 2018 ) and one uncontrolled study (Rosenberg et al, 2013 ) reported no changes to rTMS. Two controlled t-DCS studies found improvement in surrogate outcome measures, namely brain gamma-aminobutyric acid levels (Dickler et al, 2018 ) and neuropsychological testing scores (Soyata et al, 2019 ), but no improvement in clinical measures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should be noted that the papers we have included in the systematic review were quite heterogeneous in terms of study design, study population, outcome measures, duration of follow-up, comorbidities, all factors that hampered a meta-analytical approach. Moreover, only three studies were comparable in terms of stimulation protocol features and brain target (Dickler et al, 2018 ; Martinotti et al, 2019 ; Soyata et al, 2019 ), but the outcome measures were heterogeneous and impeded a meta-analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They found that two sessions of active t-DCS induced significantly increased GABA levels in comparison to sham t-DCS, and that metabolite levels were positively correlated with measures of risk taking, impulsivity, and craving (Dickler et al, 2018). Soyata et al (2019) reported that three sessions of active anodal t-DCS on the right DLPFC and cathodal t-DCS on the left DLPFC modulated decision making and cognitive flexibility, leading to more advantageous choices during the Iowa Gambling Task and better performances at the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in participants with GD. Martinotti et al (2019) reported that five consecutive sessions of active anodal right DLPFC t-DCS induced a significant reduction of craving levels in comparison to sham t-DCS in a group of treatment-seeking GD patients.…”

Section: Controlled Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Non-invasive Brain Stimulation for Gambling Disorder: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Gambling disorder (GD) is the most common behavioral addiction and shares pathophysiological and clinical features with substance use disorders (SUDs). Effective therapeutic interventions for GD are lacking. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) may represent a promising treatment option for GD. Objective: This systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive and structured overview of studies applying NIBS techniques to GD and problem gambling. Methods: A literature search using Pubmed, Web of Science, and Science Direct was conducted from databases inception to December 19, 2019, for studies assessing the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (t-DCS) on subjects with GD or problem gambling. Studies using NIBS techniques on healthy subjects and those without therapeutic goals but only aiming to assess basic neurophysiology measures were excluded. Results: A total of 269 articles were title and abstract screened, 13 full texts were assessed, and 11 were included, of which six were controlled and five were uncontrolled. Most studies showed a reduction of gambling behavior, craving for gambling, and gambling-related symptoms. NIBS effects on psychiatric symptoms were less consistent. A decrease of the behavioral activation related to gambling was also reported. Some studies reported modulation of behavioral measures (i.e., impulsivity, cognitive and attentional control, decision making, cognitive flexibility). Studies were not consistent in terms of NIBS protocol, site of stimulation, clinical and surrogate outcome measures, and duration of treatment and follow-up. Sample size was small in most studies. Conclusions: The clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the included studies prevented us from drawing any firm conclusion on the efficacy of NIBS interventions for GD. Further methodologically sound, robust, and well-powered studies are needed.

show abstract