Safety of repeated sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation: A systematic review

Nikolin, Stevan; Huggins, Christina; Martin, Donel; Alonzo, Angelo; Loo, Colleen

doi:10.1016/j.brs.2017.10.020

Cited by 94 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The combined tDCS and CET intervention was well-tolerated by participants and resulted in transient adverse events of mild-moderate severity. The most frequent side effects were skin redness, paraesthesia (tingling, burning, and itching), and headache, in agreement with prior meta-analyses of tDCS adverse events Nikolin et al, 2018a). As reported in our previous work examining the cognitive effects of tDCS with concurrent CET, treatment did not result in significant reductions in cognitive functioning .…”

Section: Safetysupporting

confidence: 90%

Assessing neurophysiological changes associated with combined transcranial direct current stimulation and cognitive emotional training for treatment-resistant depression

Nikolin

Martin

Loo

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a form of non-invasive brain stimulation, is a promising treatment for depression. Recent research suggests that tDCS efficacy can be augmented using concurrent cognitive emotional training (CET). However, the neurophysiological changes associated with this combined intervention remain to be elucidated. We therefore examined the effects of tDCS combined with CET using electroencephalography (EEG). A total of 20 participants with treatment resistant depression took part in this open-label study and received 18 sessions over 6 weeks of tDCS and concurrent CET. Resting-state and task-related EEG during a 3-back working memory task were aquired at baseline and immediately following the treatment course. Results showed an improvement in mood and working memory accuracy, but not response time, following the intervention. We did not find significant effects of the intervention on resting-state power spectral density (frontal theta and alpha asymmetry), time-frequency power (alpha eventrelated desynchronization and theta event-related synchronisation), or event-related potentials (P2 and P3 components). We therefore identified little evidence of neurophysiological changes associated with treatment using tDCS and concurrent CET, despite significant improvements in mood and near transfer effects of cognitive training to working memory accuracy. Further research incorporating a sham controlled group may be necessary to identify the neurophysiological effects of the intervention.

show abstract

Section: Safetysupporting

confidence: 90%

Assessing neurophysiological changes associated with combined transcranial direct current stimulation and cognitive emotional training for treatment-resistant depression

Nikolin

Martin

Loo

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Active transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (t‐DCS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex versus sham t‐DCS was evaluated for improving cognitive impairment in PD patients receiving computer‐based cognitive training in 1 low‐quality study; therefore, despite significant effects, the efficacy conclusion is “ insufficient evidence, ” and the practice implication “ investigational .” No safety data were reported in this study, and reports on the use of t‐DCS in PD are scarce; there is, therefore, “ insufficient evidence ” to conclude on the safety of t‐DCS in PD, even though a recent systematic review found little evidence to suggest that repeated sessions of active t‐DCS pose increased risk when compared with sham t‐DCS within the limits of parameters currently used.…”

Section: Results and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Update on treatments for nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson's disease—an evidence‐based medicine review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To update evidence‐based medicine recommendations for treating nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Background The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Committee's recommendations for treatments of PD were first published in 2002, updated in 2011, and now updated again through December 31, 2016. Methods Level I studies testing pharmacological, surgical, or nonpharmacological interventions for the treatment of nonmotor symptoms in PD were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion and quality scoring were as previously reported. The disorders covered were a range of neuropsychiatric symptoms, autonomic dysfunction, disorders of sleep and wakefulness, pain, fatigue, impaired olfaction, and ophthalmologic dysfunction. Clinical efficacy, implications for clinical practice, and safety conclusions are reported. Results A total of 37 new studies qualified for review. There were no randomized controlled trials that met inclusion criteria for the treatment of anxiety disorders, rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, excessive sweating, impaired olfaction, or ophthalmologic dysfunction. We identified clinically useful or possibly useful interventions for the treatment of depression, apathy, impulse control and related disorders, dementia, psychosis, insomnia, daytime sleepiness, drooling, orthostatic hypotension, gastrointestinal dysfunction, urinary dysfunction, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, and pain. There were no clinically useful interventions identified to treat non‐dementia‐level cognitive impairment. Conclusions The evidence base for treating a range of nonmotor symptoms in PD has grown substantially in recent years. However, treatment options overall remain limited given the high prevalence and adverse impact of these disorders, so the development and testing of new treatments for nonmotor symptoms in PD remains a top priority. © 2019 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

show abstract

“…was not certified by peer review) (which The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted January 23, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/19004218 doi: medRxiv preprint (Moffa et al, 2017;Nikolin et al, 2018). Of interest, fatigue and dizziness/light-headedness were also noted more frequently during active tRNS sessions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transcranial random noise stimulation for the acute treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial

Nikolin

Alonzo

Martin

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Transcranial electrical stimulation has broad potential as a treatment for depression. Transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), which delivers randomly fluctuating current intensities, may have greater cortical excitatory effects compared to other forms of transcranial electrical stimulation. We therefore aimed to investigate the antidepressant efficacy of tRNS. Methods Depressed participants were randomly assigned by computer number generator to receive 20 sessions of either active or sham tRNS over four weeks in a double-blinded, parallel group randomized-controlled trial. tRNS was delivered for 30mins with a direct current offset of 2mA and a random noise range of 2mA. Primary analyses assessed changes in depression severity using the Montgomery-Asperg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Neuroplasticity, neuropsychological, and safety outcomes were analysed as secondary measures. Results 69 participants were randomised, of which three discontinued treatment early leaving 66 (sham n = 34, active n = 32) for per-protocol analysis. Depression severity scores reduced in both groups (MADRS reduction in sham = 7.0 [95%CI 5.0-8.9]; and active = 5.2 [95%CI 3.2-7.3]). However, there were no differences between active and sham groups in the reduction of depressive symptoms, or the number of participants meeting response (sham = 14.7%; active = 3.1%) and remission criteria (sham = 5.9%; active = 0%). Erythema, paraesthesia, fatigue, and dizziness/light-headedness occurred more frequently in the active tRNS group. Neuroplasticity, neuropsychological and acute cognitive effects were comparable between groups. Conclusion Our results do not support the use of tRNS with the current stimulation parameters as a therapeutic intervention for the treatment of depression. Clinical trial registration at clinicaltrials.gov/NCT01792414.

show abstract

Safety of repeated sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation: A systematic review

Cited by 94 publications

References 54 publications

Assessing neurophysiological changes associated with combined transcranial direct current stimulation and cognitive emotional training for treatment-resistant depression

Assessing neurophysiological changes associated with combined transcranial direct current stimulation and cognitive emotional training for treatment-resistant depression

Update on treatments for nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson's disease—an evidence‐based medicine review

Transcranial random noise stimulation for the acute treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About