Modulating the Activity of the DLPFC and OFC Has Distinct Effects on Risk and Ambiguity Decision-Making: A tDCS Study

Yang, Xiaolan; Gao, Mei; Shi, Jinchuan; Ye, Hang; Chen, Shu

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01417

Cited by 28 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 67 publications

(118 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Two independent reviewers excluded 908 records according to their titles and abstracts during the early stage of screening. Finally, 70 records were excluded during the full-text screening and data extraction, and 20 articles were evaluated as eligible studies: including 16 articles on tDCS, [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] two on tACS, 31, 32 one on tPCS, 33 and one on highdefinition tDCS. 34 One of these articles was open label 15 and the remaining 19 were randomized controlled trials.…”

Section: Synthesized Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking behavior

Khaleghi

Jahromi

Zarafshan

et al. 2020

Psychiatry Clin Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Recent cognitive neuroscience research shows that noninvasive brain stimulation can modify a wide range of behaviors in healthy people. Such regulation effects on human behaviors provide new insights into the neurobiology of cognitive processes and establish causal brain–behavior relations. Here, we aimed to examine the effects of transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) of the prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking. Methods We performed a systematic search on the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases with appropriate keywords for original studies reporting the use of TES to modulate risk‐taking behavior in healthy individuals. Then, in the meta‐analysis phase, a random‐effects model was used to measure the pooled effect size (ES). Results Twenty articles were evaluated as eligible studies, including 16 articles on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), two on transcranial alternating current stimulation, one on transcranial pulsed current stimulation, and one on high‐definition tDCS. A meta‐analysis showed a pooled estimated standardized ES of −0.20 (95% confidence interval [CI], –0.39 to −0.01), which indicates a small ES for active tDCS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in comparison to sham stimulation (z = 2.31, P = 0.03) in terms of less risky behaviors. Subgroup analysis showed that there is no significant ES for bilateral DLPFC stimulation (d = −0.01; 95%CI, –0.28 to 0.26), but a significant near‐medium ES for unilateral DLPFC stimulation (d = −0.41; 95%CI, –0.71 to −0.10). Conclusion Our findings support a significant impact of neuroregulation of the DLPFC on risk‐taking behavior in healthy individuals. Unilateral noninvasive electrical stimulation of the DLPFC can result in a conservative risk‐averse response style, probably through modulating plasticity of the relevant brain networks, including cortical and subcortical structures, as well as increasing subcortical dopaminergic activity.

show abstract

Section: Synthesized Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking behavior

Khaleghi

Jahromi

Zarafshan

et al. 2020

Psychiatry Clin Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 However, damage to the functional anatomy within the ACA territory may not be reflected in the overall functional status of the patient. Higher cortical function in the ACA territory such as planning, motivation, mood, and emotions 30,31 may not directly factor into the ability to perform basic self-care and ambulation. DC, in conjunction with modern ICP-lowering methods, is sufficient to compensate for the increased swelling from the additional region involved in an ICA infarction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decompressive craniectomy for internal carotid artery and middle carotid artery infarctions: a long-term comparative outcome study

Lim

Vedicherla

Chan

et al. 2021

Neurosurgical Focus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE Malignant internal carotid artery (ICA) infarction is an entirely different disease entity when compared with middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarction. Because of an increased area of infarction, it is assumed to have a poorer prognosis; however, this has never been adequately investigated. Decompressive craniectomy (DC) for malignant MCA infarction has been shown to improve mortality rates in several randomized controlled trials. Conversely, aggressive surgical decompression for ICA infarction has not been recommended. The authors sought to compare the functional outcomes and survival between patients with ICA infarctions and those with MCA infarctions after DC in the largest series to date to investigate this assumption. METHODS A multicenter retrospective review of 154 consecutive DCs for large territory cerebral infarctions performed from 2005 to 2020 were analyzed. Patients were divided into ICA and MCA groups depending on the territory of infarction. Variables, including age, sex, medical comorbidities, laterality of the infarction, preoperative neurological status, primary stroke treatment, and the time from stroke onset to DC, were recorded. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed for the clinical exposures for functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score) on discharge and at the 1- and 6-month follow-ups, and for mortality, both inpatient and at the 1-year follow-up. A favorable mRS score was defined as 0–2. RESULTS There were 67 patients (43.5%) and 87 patients (56.5%) in the ICA and MCA groups, respectively. Univariable analysis showed that the ICA group had a comparably favorable mRS (OR 0.15 [95% CI 0.18–1.21], p = 0.077). Inpatient mortality (OR 1.79 [95% CI 0.79–4.03], p = 0.16) and 1-year mortality (OR 2.07 [95% CI 0.98–4.37], p = 0.054) were comparable between the groups. After adjustment, a favorable mRS score at 6 months (OR 0.17 [95% CI 0.018–1.59], p = 0.12), inpatient mortality (OR 1.02 [95% CI 0.29–3.57], p = 0.97), and 1-year mortality (OR 0.94 [95% CI 0.41–2.69], p = 0.88) were similar in both groups. The overall survival, plotted using the Cox proportional hazard regression, did not show a significant difference between the ICA and MCA groups (HR 0.581). CONCLUSIONS Unlike previous smaller studies, this study found that patients with malignant ICA infarction had a functional outcome and survival that was similar to those with MCA infarction after DC. Therefore, DC can be offered for malignant ICA infarction for life-saving purposes with limited functional recovery.

show abstract

“…Regarding OFC stimulation, each participant was randomly signed to one of the three stimulation treatments: (1) the anodal electrode was placed over the right Fp2, and the cathodal electrode was placed over the left Fp1; (2) the anodal electrode was placed over the left Fp1, and the cathodal electrode was placed over the right Fp2; and (3) sham stimulation (Figure 2). Previous studies in the literature have proven that these stimulations were effective in modulating the activity of the OFC (Ouellet et al, 2015;Willis et al, 2015;Wang et al, 2016;Yang et al, 2017). The tDCS lasted 20 min, with a 30-s ramp (up and down) current of 1.5 mA to each OFC.…”

Section: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, we conducted the experiment. According to the research of Ouellet et al (2015) and Yang et al (2017) , the tDCS stimulation of the OFC is conducted as follows: anodal left OFC/cathodal right OFC, cathodal left OFC/anodal right OFC, and sham anodal/cathodal OFC. Based on the different functions of the left OFC and right OFC, our experiment also utilized this stimulus.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulating OFC Activity With tDCS Alters Regret About Human Decision-Making

Chen

et al. 2021

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regret is a common emotion in daily life. Humans always regret their decision-making choices if the chosen outcome is bad. Neuroscientific studies suggest that the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) influences feelings of regret. We used a transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) device to study the role of regret in participants’ decision-making by modulating the activity of the OFC. The two-wheel-of-fortune gamble task was used in our experimental design, and we asked the participants to rate their feelings of regret after the computer presented the obtained and unobtained outcomes. The experimental results revealed that the effect of stimulation type was significant, which indicated that the influence of the OFC in regret was modulated by tDCS. Furthermore, based on post hoc analyses (Bonferroni), regret was lower in those who received left anodal/right cathodal stimulation than in those who received sham stimulation, which revealed that modulating the activity of the OFC reduced the emotional intensity of regret. In addition, an inverted U-shaped curve characterized the mean ratings of regret over time.

show abstract

Modulating the Activity of the DLPFC and OFC Has Distinct Effects on Risk and Ambiguity Decision-Making: A tDCS Study

Cited by 28 publications

References 67 publications

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking behavior

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking behavior

Decompressive craniectomy for internal carotid artery and middle carotid artery infarctions: a long-term comparative outcome study

Modulating OFC Activity With tDCS Alters Regret About Human Decision-Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About