Dylan J. Edwards

Clinical research with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Challenges and future directions

BACKGROUND Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique that delivers low-intensity, direct current to cortical areas facilitating or inhibiting spontaneous neuronal activity. In the past 10 years, tDCS physiologic mechanisms of action have been intensively investigated giving support for the investigation of its applications in clinical neuropsychiatry and rehabilitation. However, new methodologic, ethical, and regulatory issues emerge when translating the findings of preclinical and phase I studies into phase II and III clinical studies. The aim of this comprehensive review is to discuss the key challenges of this process and possible methods to address them. METHODS We convened a workgroup of researchers in the field to review, discuss, and provide updates and key challenges of tDCS use in clinical research. MAIN FINDINGS/DISCUSSION We reviewed several basic and clinical studies in the field and identified potential limitations, taking into account the particularities of the technique. We review and discuss the findings into four topics: (1) mechanisms of action of tDCS, parameters of use and computer-based human brain modeling investigating electric current fields and magnitude induced by tDCS; (2) methodologic aspects related to the clinical research of tDCS as divided according to study phase (ie, preclinical, phase I, phase II, and phase III studies); (3) ethical and regulatory concerns; and (4) future directions regarding novel approaches, novel devices, and future studies involving tDCS. Finally, we propose some alternative methods to facilitate clinical research on tDCS.

Physiological and modeling evidence for focal transcranial electrical brain stimulation in humans: A basis for high-definition tDCS

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive, low-cost, well-tolerated technique producing lasting modulation of cortical excitability. Behavioral and therapeutic outcomes of tDCS are linked to the targeted brain regions, but there is little evidence that current reaches the brain as intended. We aimed to: (1) validate a computational model for estimating cortical electric fields in human transcranial stimulation, and (2) assess the magnitude and spread of cortical electric field with a novel High-Definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) scalp montage using a 4 × 1-Ring electrode configuration. In three healthy adults, Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (TES) over primary motor cortex (M1) was delivered using the 4 × 1 montage (4 × cathode, surrounding a single central anode; montage radius ~3 cm) with sufficient intensity to elicit a discrete muscle twitch in the hand. The estimated current distribution in M1 was calculated using the individualized MRI-based model, and compared with the observed motor response across subjects. The response magnitude was quantified with stimulation over motor cortex as well as anterior and posterior to motor cortex. In each case the model data were consistent with the motor response across subjects. The estimated cortical electric fields with the 4 × 1 montage were compared (area, magnitude, direction) for TES and tDCS in each subject. We provide direct evidence in humans that TES with a 4 × 1-Ring configuration can activate motor cortex and that current does not substantially spread outside the stimulation area. Computational models predict that both TES and tDCS waveforms using the 4 × 1-Ring configuration generate electric fields in cortex with comparable gross current distribution, and preferentially directed normal (inward) currents. The agreement of modeling and experimental data for both current delivery and focality support the use of the HD-tDCS 4 × 1-Ring montage for cortically targeted neuromodulation.

Repetitive paired-pulse TMS at I-wave periodicity markedly increases corticospinal excitability: A new technique for modulating synaptic plasticity

OBJECTIVE We hypothesised that facilitatory I-wave interaction set up by paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation delivered with I-wave periodicity (iTMS) may reinforce trans-synaptic events and provide a means for modulating synaptic plasticity and cortical excitability. Our objective was to determine whether prolonged iTMS can increase corticospinal excitability, and whether this form of stimulation can have lasting aftereffects. METHODS Paired stimuli of equal strength with a 1.5 ms inter-stimulus interval were delivered for 30 min at a rate of 0.2 Hz. Motor threshold and motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude to single-pulse TMS was compared before and after intervention. RESULTS Paired-pulse MEP amplitude increased linearly throughout the period of iTMS, and had increased five-fold by the end of the stimulation period. Single-pulse MEP amplitude was increased a mean of four-fold for 10 min after stimulation. Motor threshold was unaffected. CONCLUSIONS iTMS is an effective method for increasing excitability of the human motor cortex, and probably acts by increasing synaptic efficacy. SIGNIFICANCE Reinforcement of trans-synaptic events by iTMS may provide a means to investigate and modulate synaptic plasticity in the brain.

Raised corticomotor excitability of M1 forearm area following anodal tDCS is sustained during robotic wrist therapy in chronic stroke.

PURPOSE Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can transiently increase corticomotor excitability of intrinsic hand muscles and improve upper limb function in patients with chronic stroke. As a preliminary study, we tested whether increased corticomotor excitability would be similarly observed in muscles acting about the wrist, and remain present during robotic training involving active wrist movements, in six chronic stroke patients with residual motor deficit. METHODS Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) generated motor evoked potentials (MEP) in the flexor carpi radialis (FCR) and provided a measure of corticomotor excitability and short-interval cortical inhibition (SICI) before and immediately after a period of tDCS (1 mA, 20 min, anode and TMS applied to the lesioned hemisphere), and robotic wrist training (1hr). RESULTS Following tDCS, the same TMS current strength evoked an increased MEP amplitude (mean 168 +/- 22%SEM; p < 0.05), that remained increased after robot training (166 +/- 23%; p < 0.05). Conditioned MEPs were of significantly lower amplitude relative to unconditioned MEPs prior to tDCS (62 +/- 6%, p < 0.05), but not after tDCS (89 +/- 14%, p = 0.40), or robot training (91 +/- 8%, p = 0.28), suggesting that the increased corticomotor excitability is associated with reduced intracortical inhibition. CONCLUSION The persistence of these effects after robotic motor training, indicates that a motor learning and retraining program can co-exist with tDCS-induced changes in cortical motor excitability, and supports the concept of combining brain stimulation with physical therapy to promote recovery after brain injury.

Safety of theta burst transcranial magnetic stimulation: a systematic review of the literature.

Theta burst stimulation (TBS) protocols have recently emerged as a method to transiently alter cortical excitability in the human brain through repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. TBS involves applying short trains of stimuli at high frequency repeated at intervals of 200 milliseconds. Because repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is known to carry a risk of seizures, safety guidelines have been established. TBS has the theoretical potential of conferring an even higher risk of seizure than other repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols because it delivers high-frequency bursts. In light of the recent report of a seizure induced by TBS, the safety of this new protocol deserves consideration. We performed an English language literature search and reviewed all studies published from May 2004 to December 2009 in which TBS was applied. The adverse events were documented, and crude risk was calculated. The majority of adverse events attributed to TBS were mild and occurred in 5% of subjects. Based on this review, TBS seems to be a safe and efficacious technique. However, given its novelty, it should be applied with caution. Additionally, this review highlights the need for rigorous documentation of adverse events associated with TBS and intensity dosing studies to assess the seizure risk associated with various stimulation parameters (e.g., frequency, intensity, and location).

Robotic devices as therapeutic and diagnostic tools for stroke recovery.

The understanding that recovery of brain function after stroke is imperfect has prompted decades of effort to engender speedier and better recovery through environmental manipulation. Clinical evidence has shown that the performance plateau exhibited by patients with chronic stroke, usually signaling an end of standard rehabilitation, might represent a period of consolidation rather than a performance optimum. These results highlight the difficulty of translating pertinent neurological data into pragmatic changes in clinical programs. This opinion piece focuses on upper limb impairment reduction after robotic training. We propose that robotic devices be considered as novel tools that might be used alone or in combination with novel pharmacology and other bioengineered devices. Additionally, robotic devices can measure motor performance objectively and will contribute to a detailed phenotype of stroke recovery.

Eccentric utilization ratio: effect of sport and phase of training.

The eccentric utilization ratio (EUR), which is the ratio of countermovement jump (CMJ) to static jump (SJ) performance, has been suggested as a useful indicator of power performance in athletes. The purpose of the study was to compare the EUR of athletes from a variety of different sports and during different phases of training. A total of 142 athletes from rugby union, Australian Rules Football, soccer, softball, and field hockey were tested. Subjects performed both CMJ and SJ on a force plate integrated with a position transducer. The EUR was measured as the ratio of CMJ to SJ for jump height and peak power. The rugby union, Australian Rules Football, and hockey athletes were tested during off-season and preseason to provide EUR data during different phases of training. For men, EUR for soccer, Australian Rules Football, and rugby was greater than softball (effect size range, 0.83–0.92). For women, EUR for soccer was greater than field hockey and softball (0.86–1.0). There was a significant difference between the jump height and peak power method for the Australian Rules Football, rugby, and field hockey tests conducted preseason (p < 0.05). For field hockey, there was a significant increase in EUR from offseason to preseason. Athletes in sports such as soccer, rugby union, and Australian Rules Football appear to have higher EUR values, which reflects the greater reliance on stretch shortening activities in these sports. It does appear that EUR can be used to track changes in training with the values significantly increasing from off-season to preseason. The EUR provides the practitioner with information about the performance of athletes and appears to be sensitive to changes in the type of training being undertaken.

Classification of methods in transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) and evolving strategy from historical approaches to contemporary innovations

Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) encompasses all methods of non-invasive current application to the brain used in research and clinical practice. We present the first comprehensive and technical review, explaining the evolution of tES in both terminology and dosage over the past 100 years of research to present day. Current transcranial Pulsed Current Stimulation (tPCS) approaches such as Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation (CES) descended from Electrosleep (ES) through Cranial Electro-stimulation Therapy (CET), Transcerebral Electrotherapy (TCET), and NeuroElectric Therapy (NET) while others like Transcutaneous Cranial Electrical Stimulation (TCES) descended from Electroanesthesia (EA) through Limoge, and Interferential Stimulation. Prior to a contemporary resurgence in interest, variations of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation were explored intermittently, including Polarizing current, Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation (GVS), and Transcranial Micropolarization. The development of these approaches alongside Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) and pharmacological developments are considered. Both the roots and unique features of contemporary approaches such as transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) and transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS) are discussed. Trends and incremental developments in electrode montage and waveform spanning decades are presented leading to the present day. Commercial devices, seminal conferences, and regulatory decisions are noted. We conclude with six rules on how increasing medical and technological sophistication may now be leveraged for broader success and adoption of tES.

Transcranial DC stimulation coupled with TENS for the treatment of chronic pain : a preliminary study

ObjectiveBased on evidence showing that electrical stimulation of the nervous system is an effective method to decrease chronic neurogenic pain, we aimed to investigate whether the combination of 2 methods of electrical stimulation—a method of peripheral stimulation [transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS)] and a method of noninvasive brain stimulation [transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)]—induces greater pain reduction as compared with tDCS alone and sham stimulation. MethodsWe performed a preliminary, randomized, sham-controlled, crossover, clinical study in which 8 patients were randomized to receive active tDCS/active TENS (“tDCS/TENS” group), active tDCS/sham TENS (“tDCS” group), and sham tDCS/sham TENS (“sham” group) stimulation. Assessments were performed immediately before and after each condition by a blinded rater. ResultsThe results showed that there was a significant difference in pain reduction across the conditions of stimulation (P=0.006). Post hoc tests showed significant pain reduction as compared with baseline after the tDCS/TENS condition [reduction by 36.5% (±10.7), P=0.004] and the tDCS condition [reduction by 15.5% (±4.9), P=0.014], but not after sham stimulation (P=0.35). In addition, tDCS/TENS induced greater pain reduction than tDCS (P=0.02). ConclusionsThe results of this pilot study suggest that the combination of TENS with tDCS has a superior effect compared with tDCS alone.

Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (ctDCS) A Novel Approach to Understanding Cerebellar Function in Health and Disease

The cerebellum is critical for both motor and cognitive control. Dysfunction of the cerebellum is a component of multiple neurological disorders. In recent years, interventions have been developed that aim to excite or inhibit the activity and function of the human cerebellum. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the cerebellum (ctDCS) promises to be a powerful tool for the modulation of cerebellar excitability. This technique has gained popularity in recent years as it can be used to investigate human cerebellar function, is easily delivered, is well tolerated, and has not shown serious adverse effects. Importantly, the ability of ctDCS to modify behavior makes it an interesting approach with a potential therapeutic role for neurological patients. Through both electrical and non-electrical effects (vascular, metabolic) ctDCS is thought to modify the activity of the cerebellum and alter the output from cerebellar nuclei. Physiological studies have shown a polarity-specific effect on the modulation of cerebellar–motor cortex connectivity, likely via cerebellar–thalamocortical pathways. Modeling studies that have assessed commonly used electrode montages have shown that the ctDCS-generated electric field reaches the human cerebellum with little diffusion to neighboring structures. The posterior and inferior parts of the cerebellum (i.e., lobules VI-VIII) seem particularly susceptible to modulation by ctDCS. Numerous studies have shown to date that ctDCS can modulate motor learning, and affect cognitive and emotional processes. Importantly, this intervention has a good safety profile; similar to when applied over cerebral areas. Thus, investigations have begun exploring ctDCS as a viable intervention for patients with neurological conditions.