Test-retest reliability of prefrontal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) effects on functional MRI connectivity in healthy subjects

Wörsching, Jana; Padberg, Frank; Helbich, K.; Hasan, Alkomiet; Koch, Lena von; Goerigk, Stephan; Stoecklein, Sophia; Ertl‐Wagner, Birgit; Keeser, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.04.052

Cited by 37 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the scan, participants completed a 6.5‐minute resting state scan while looking at a fixation cross. Given our within‐subjects design, it is important to note that resting state data have good test‐retest reliability (; although see). Participants also completed two tasks during the scan, one involved passively viewing images, and the other was a modified version of the monetary incentive delay task that was not cognitively demanding (data reported elsewhere).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methamphetamine acutely alters frontostriatal resting state functional connectivity in healthy young adults

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic use of methamphetamine impairs frontostriatal structure and function, which may result in increased incentive-motivational responses to drug cues and decreased regulation of drug-seeking behavior. However, less is known regarding how the drug affects these circuits after acute administration. The current study examined the effects of a single dose of methamphetamine on resting state frontostriatal functional connectivity in healthy volunteers. Participants (n = 22, 12 female) completed two sessions in which they received methamphetamine (20 mg) and placebo before a resting state scan during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Participants also provided self-report measures of euphoria and stimulation at regular intervals. We conducted seed-based voxelwise functional connectivity analyses using three bilateral striatal seed regions: nucleus accumbens (NAcc), caudate, and putamen and compared connectivity following methamphetamine versus placebo administration.Additionally, we conducted correlational analyses to assess if drug-induced changes in functional connectivity were related to changes in subjective response.Methamphetamine increased NAcc functional connectivity with medial frontal regions (ie, orbitofrontal cortex, medial frontal gyrus, and superior frontal gyrus) and decreased NAcc functional connectivity with subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Methamphetamine also increased functional connectivity between putamen and left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), and individuals who displayed greater druginduced increase in connectivity reported less euphoria and stimulation. These findings provide important information regarding the effects of methamphetamine on brain function in nonaddicted individuals. Further studies will reveal whether such effects contribute to the abuse potential of the drug and whether they are related to the frontostriatal impairments observed after chronic methamphetamine use.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methamphetamine acutely alters frontostriatal resting state functional connectivity in healthy young adults

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), a key hub for executive functions, working memory and reasoning, consistently reported increased FC within the FPN after atDCS [43, 47, 48]. Studies targeting the temporo-parietal cortex, a key region of the DMN, reported relatively consistent changes within this network.…”

Section: Local and Distal Connectivity Effects Of Nibsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies in healthy subjects suggest that the executive function benefits may be mediated by FPN modulation [43, 47, 48]. Therefore, DLPFC modulation through NIBS may be an effective strategy to modulate executive functions in all those neurological disorders suffering from executive dysfunction.…”

Section: Nibs and Dementiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Dementia: A Complex Network Story

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is emerging as a promising rehabilitation tool for a number of neurodegenerative diseases. However, the therapeutic mechanisms of NIBS are not completely understood. In this review, we will summarize NIBS results in the context of brain imaging studies of functional connectivity and metabolites to gain insight into the possible mechanisms underlying recovery. We will briefly discuss how the clinical manifestations of common neurodegenerative disorders may be related with aberrant connectivity within large-scale neural networks. We will then focus on recent studies combining resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging with NIBS to delineate how stimulation of different brain regions induce complex network modifications, both at the local and distal level. Moreover, we will review studies combining magnetic resonance spectroscopy and NIBS to investigate how microscale changes are related to modifications of large-scale networks. Finally, we will re-examine previous NIBS studies in dementia in light of this network perspective. A better understanding of NIBS impact on the functionality of large-scale brain networks may be useful to design beneficial treatments for neurodegenerative disorders.

show abstract

“…In humans, tDCS is being used to investigate brain‐behavior relationships and is currently under investigation for treatment potential in various neurological and psychiatric disorders (Brunoni et al, ). However, despite encouraging results in human neurophysiological experiments (Nitsche & Paulus, ; Nitsche & Paulus, ; Stagg & Nitsche, ), clinical trials (Antal et al, ; Bikson et al, ; Boggio et al, ; Brunoni et al, ; Fregni et al, ; Lefaucheur et al, ; Valle et al, ) and detailed characterization of its physiological mechanisms of action in animal models (Bikson et al, ; Ironside et al, ; Jackson et al, ; O'Shea & Revol, ), questions remain about protocol optimization, especially as relating to inter‐ and intra‐individual variability (Chew, Ho, & Loo, ; Dyke, Kim, Jackson, & Jackson, ; Horvath, Vogrin, Carter, Cook, & Forte, ; Lopez‐Alonso, Fernandez‐Del‐Olmo, Costantini, Gonzalez‐Henriquez, & Cheeran, ; Worsching et al, ). The integration of tDCS with modern neuroimaging techniques (Saiote, Turi, Paulus, & Antal, ; Turi, Paulus, & Antal, ) is likely to represent a key methodological approach for advancing our understanding of the functional correlates of tDCS mechanisms in terms of changes in patterns of brain activation and for understanding individual differences in response to stimulation (Buch et al, ; Esmaeilpour et al, ; Giordano et al, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodology for tDCS integration with fMRI

Esmaeilpour

Shereen

Ghobadi‐Azbari

et al. 2019

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding and reducing variability of response to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) requires measuring what factors predetermine sensitivity to tDCS and tracking individual response to tDCS. Human trials, animal models, and computational models suggest structural traits and functional states of neural systems are the major sources of this variance. There are 118 published tDCS studies (up to October 1, 2018) that used fMRI as a proxy measure of neural activation to answer mechanistic, predictive, and localization questions about how brain activity is modulated by tDCS. FMRI can potentially contribute as: a measure of cognitive state‐level variance in baseline brain activation before tDCS; inform the design of stimulation montages that aim to target functional networks during specific tasks; and act as an outcome measure of functional response to tDCS. In this systematic review, we explore methodological parameter space of tDCS integration with fMRI spanning: (a) fMRI timing relative to tDCS (pre, post, concurrent); (b) study design (parallel, crossover); (c) control condition (sham, active control); (d) number of tDCS sessions; (e) number of follow up scans; (f) stimulation dose and combination with task; (g) functional imaging sequence (BOLD, ASL, resting); and (h) additional behavioral (cognitive, clinical) or quantitative (neurophysiological, biomarker) measurements. Existing tDCS‐fMRI literature shows little replication across these permutations; few studies used comparable study designs. Here, we use a representative sample study with both task and resting state fMRI before and after tDCS in a crossover design to discuss methodological confounds. We further outline how computational models of current flow should be combined with imaging data to understand sources of variability. Through the representative sample study, we demonstrate how modeling and imaging methodology can be integrated for individualized analysis. Finally, we discuss the importance of conducting tDCS‐fMRI with stimulation equipment certified as safe to use inside the MR scanner, and of correcting for image artifacts caused by tDCS. tDCS‐fMRI can address important questions on the functional mechanisms of tDCS action (e.g., target engagement) and has the potential to support enhancement of behavioral interventions, provided studies are designed rationally.

show abstract

Test-retest reliability of prefrontal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) effects on functional MRI connectivity in healthy subjects

Cited by 37 publications

References 109 publications

Methamphetamine acutely alters frontostriatal resting state functional connectivity in healthy young adults

Methamphetamine acutely alters frontostriatal resting state functional connectivity in healthy young adults

Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Dementia: A Complex Network Story

Methodology for tDCS integration with fMRI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About