Search

Treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) generally improves with deep-brain stimulation (DBS), thought to modulate neural activity at both the implantation site and in connected brain regions. However, its invasive nature, side-effects, and lack of customization, make non-invasive treatments preferable. Harnessing the established remote effects of cortical transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), connectivity-based approaches have emerged for depression that aim at influencing distant regions connected to the stimulation site. We here investigated whether effective OCD DBS targets (here subthalamic nucleus [STN] and nucleus accumbens [NAc]) could be modulated non-invasively with TMS. In a proof-of-concept study with nine healthy individuals, we used 7T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and probabilistic tractography to reconstruct the fiber tracts traversing manually segmented STN/NAc. Two TMS targets were individually selected based on the strength of their structural connectivity to either the STN, or both the STN and NAc. In a sham-controlled, within-subject cross-over design, TMS was administered over the personalized targets, located around the precentral and middle frontal gyrus. Resting-state functional 3T MRI was acquired before, and at 5 and 25 min after stimulation to investigate TMS-induced changes in the functional connectivity of the STN and NAc with other regions of the brain. Static and dynamic seed-to-voxel correlation analyses were conducted. TMS over both targets was able to modulate the functional connectivity of the STN and NAc, engaging both overlapping and distinct regions, and unfolding following different temporal dynamics. Given the relevance of the engaged connected regions to OCD pathology, we argue that a personalized, connectivity-based procedure is worth investigating as potential treatment for refractory OCD.

Although risk is prevalent in decision-making, the specific neural processes underlying risk-taking behavior remain unclear. Previous studies have suggested that frontal theta-band activity plays a crucial role in modulating risk-taking behavior. The functional relevance of theta in risk-taking behavior is yet to be clearly established and studies using noninvasive brain stimulation have yielded inconsistent findings. We aimed to investigate this relevance using transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) over right or left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). We also studied the influence of stimulation intensity on risk-taking behavior and electrophysiological effects.We applied theta-band (6.5 Hz) tACS over the left (F3) and right (F4) DLPFC with lower (1.5 mA) and higher (3 mA) tACS intensities. We employed a single-blinded, sham-controlled, within-subject design and combined tACS with electroencephalography (EEG) measurements and the Maastricht Gambling Task (MGT) to elicit and evaluate risk-taking behavior.Our results show an increase in risk-taking behavior after left DLPFC stimulation at both intensities and a reduction of risk-taking behavior after 3 mA (and not 1.5 mA) right DLPFC stimulation compared to sham. Further analyses showed a negative correlation between resting-state frontal theta-power and risk-taking behavior. Overall, frontal theta-power was increased after left, but not right, theta-band tACS independent of stimulation intensity.Our findings confirm the functional relevance of frontal theta-band activity in decision-making under risk and the differential role of left and right DLPFC. We also were able to show that stimulation intensity did have an effect on behavioral responses, namely risk-taking behavior. Significant right hemisphere stimulation effects were observed only after high-intensity stimulation. Nevertheless, electrophysiological effects were only significant after left DLPFC stimulation, regardless of tACS intensity. Furthermore, the results indicate the role of the baseline frontal theta-power in the direction of behavioral effects after theta-band tACS.

Visuospatial attention theories often propose hemispheric asymmetries underlying the control of attention. In general support of these theories, previous EEG/MEG studies have shown that spatial attention is associated with hemispheric modulation of posterior alpha power (gating by inhibition). However, since measures of alpha power are typically expressed as lateralization scores, or collapsed across left and right attention shifts, the individual hemispheric contribution to the attentional control mechanism remains unclear. This is, however, the most crucial and decisive aspect in which the currently competing attention theories continue to disagree. To resolve this long-standing conflict, we derived predictions regarding alpha power modulations from Heilman’s hemispatial theory and Kinsbourne’s interhemispheric competition theory and tested them empirically in an EEG experiment. We used an attention paradigm capable of isolating alpha power modulation in two attentional states, namely attentional bias in a neutral cue condition and spatial orienting following directional cues. Differential alpha modulations were found for both hemispheres across conditions. When anticipating peripheral visual targets without preceding directional cues (neutral condition), posterior alpha power in the left hemisphere was generally lower and more strongly modulated than in the right hemisphere, in line with the interhemispheric competition theory. Intriguingly, however, while alpha power in the right hemisphere was modulated by both, cue-directed leftward and rightward attention shifts, the left hemisphere only showed modulations by rightward shifts of spatial attention, in line with the hemispatial theory. This suggests that the two theories may not be mutually exclusive, but rather apply to different attentional states.