Search

Attempts to enhance human memory and learning ability have a long tradition in science. This topic has recently gained substantial attention because of the increasing percentage of older individuals worldwide and the predicted rise of age-associated cognitive decline in brain functions. Transcranial brain stimulation methods, such as transcranial magnetic (TMS) and transcranial electric (tES) stimulation, have been extensively used in an effort to improve cognitive functions in humans. Here we summarize the available data on low-intensity tES for this purpose, in comparison to repetitive TMS and some pharmacological agents, such as caffeine and nicotine. There is no single area in the brain stimulation field in which only positive outcomes have been reported. For self-directed tES devices, how to restrict variability with regard to efficacy is an essential aspect of device design and function. As with any technique, reproducible outcomes depend on the equipment and how well this is matched to the experience and skill of the operator. For self-administered non-invasive brain stimulation, this requires device designs that rigorously incorporate human operator factors. The wide parameter space of non-invasive brain stimulation, including dose (e.g., duration, intensity (current density), number of repetitions), inclusion/exclusion (e.g., subject's age), and homeostatic effects, administration of tasks before and during stimulation, and, most importantly, placebo or nocebo effects, have to be taken into account. The outcomes of stimulation are expected to depend on these parameters and should be strictly controlled. The consensus among experts is that low-intensity tES is safe as long as tested and accepted protocols (including, for example, dose, inclusion/exclusion) are followed and devices are used which follow established engineering risk-management procedures. Devices and protocols that allow stimulation outside these parameters cannot claim to be "safe" where they are applying stimulation beyond that examined in published studies that also investigated potential side effects. Brain stimulation devices marketed for consumer use are distinct from medical devices because they do not make medical claims and are therefore not necessarily subject to the same level of regulation as medical devices (i.e., by government agencies tasked with regulating medical devices). Manufacturers must follow ethical and best practices in marketing tES stimulators, including not misleading users by referencing effects from human trials using devices and protocols not similar to theirs. [Abstract copyright: © 2022 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier B.V.]

Highlights • Electrode-generated currents exhibit several limitations when used to suppress seizure in clinical practice. • Magnetic stimulation provides enhanced biocompatibility, efficiency, and consistency over implanted electrode. • Clinical cases that utilize magnetic fields for epilepsy treatment are effective and relatively safe. • Current understanding of the cellular mechanisms underlying magnetic control of epileptic circuitry is insufficient. • In vivo and in vitro animal models are developed for neurological studies pertaining to the magnetic suppression of seizure., Non-invasive brain tissue stimulation with a magnetic coil provides several irreplaceable advantages over that with an implanted electrode, in altering neural activities under pathological situations. We reviewed clinical cases that utilized time-varying magnetic fields for the treatment of epilepsy, and the safety issues related to this practice. Animal models have been developed to foster understanding of the cellular/molecular mechanisms underlying magnetic control of epileptic activity. These mechanisms include (but are not limited to) (1) direct membrane polarization by the magnetic field, (2) depolarization blockade by the deactivation of ion channels, (3) alteration in synaptic transmission, and (4) interruption of ephaptic interaction and cellular synchronization. Clinical translation of this technology could be improved through the advancement of magnetic design, optimization of stimulation protocols, and evaluation of the long-term safety. Cellular and molecular studies focusing on the mechanisms of magnetic stimulation are of great value in facilitating this translation.

Graphical abstract, Highlights • First study using machine learning to classify rTMS language mapping results in tumor patients. • Analysis of 90 patients reveals rTMS-induced error patterns in aphasic/non-aphasic patients. • Increased vulnerability of right pars triangularis to rTMS in aphasic patients with left gliomas., Repetitive TMS (rTMS) allows for non-invasive and transient disruption of local neuronal functioning. We used machine learning approaches to assess whether brain tumor patients can be accurately classified into aphasic and non-aphasic groups using their rTMS language mapping results as input features. Given that each tumor affects the subject-specific language networks differently, resulting in heterogenous rTMS functional mappings, we propose the use of machine learning strategies to classify potential patterns of rTMS language mapping results. We retrospectively included 90 patients with left perisylvian world health organization (WHO) grade II-IV gliomas that underwent presurgical navigated rTMS language mapping. Within our cohort, 29 of 90 (32.2%) patients suffered from at least mild aphasia as shown in the Aachen Aphasia Test based Berlin Aphasia Score (BAS). After spatial normalization to MNI 152 of all rTMS spots, we calculated the error rate (ER) in each stimulated cortical area (28 regions of interest, ROI) by automated anatomical labeling parcellation (AAL3) and IIT. We used a support vector machine (SVM) to classify significant areas in relation to aphasia. After feeding the ROIs into the SVM model, it revealed that in addition to age (w = 2.98), the ERs of the left supramarginal gyrus (w = 3.64), left inferior parietal gyrus (w = 2.28) and right pars triangularis (w = 1.34) contributed more than other features to the model. The model’s sensitivity was 86.2%, the specificity was 82.0%, the overall accuracy was 85.5% and the AUC was 89.3%. Our results demonstrate an increased vulnerability of right inferior pars triangularis to rTMS in aphasic patients due to left perisylvian gliomas. This finding points towards a functional relevant involvement of the right pars triangularis in response to aphasia. The tumor location feature, specified by calculating overlaps with white and grey matter atlases, did not affect the SVM model. The left supramarginal gyrus as a feature improved our SVM model the most. Additionally, our results could point towards a decreasing potential for neuroplasticity with age.

Objective: To investigate the role of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) along with conventional physiotherapy in the functional recovery of patients with subacute ischemic stroke. Design: Double-blind, parallel group, randomized controlled trial. Setting: The outpatient department of a tertiary hospital participants: first ever ischemic stroke patients (N=96) in the previous 15 days were recruited and were randomized after a run-in period of 75±7 days into real rTMS (n=47) and sham rTMS (n=49) groups. Intervention: Conventional physical therapy was given to both the groups for 90±7 days postrecruitment. Total 10 sessions of low-frequency rTMS on contralesional premotor cortex was administered to real rTMS group (n=47) over a period of 2 weeks followed by physiotherapy regime for 45-50 minutes. Main Outcome Measures: The primary efficacy outcomes were change in modified Barthel Index (mBI) score (pre- to postscore) and proportion of participants with mBI score more than 90, measured at 90±7 days postrecruitment. The secondary outcomes were change in Fugl-Meyer Assessment–upper extremity, Fugl-Meyer Assessment–lower extremity, Hamilton Depression Scale, modified Rankin Scale, and National Institute of Health and Stroke Scale (pre- to post-rTMS) scores at 90±7 days post recruitment. Results: Modified intention to treat analysis showed a significant increase in the mBI score from pre- to post-rTMS in real rTMS group (4.96±4.06) versus sham rTMS group (2.65±3.25). There was no significant difference in proportion of patients with mBI>90 (55% vs 59%; P=.86) at 3 months between the groups. Conclusion: In patients with subacute ischemic stroke, 1-Hz low-frequency rTMS on contralesional premotor cortex along with conventional physical therapy resulted in significant change in mBI score. Keywords: Rehabilitation, Stroke, Transcranial magnetic stimulation

Background A relevant proportion of patients with panic disorder (PD) does not improve even though they receive state of the art treatment for anxiety disorders such as cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). At the same time, it is known, that from a neurobiological point of view, PD patients are often characterised by prefrontal hypoactivation. Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) is a non-invasive type of neurostimulation which can modulate cortical activity and thus has the potential to normalise prefrontal hypoactivity found in PD. We therefore aimed at investigating the effects of iTBS as an innovative add-on to CBT in the treatment for PD. Methods In this double-blind, bicentric study, 44 PD patients, randomised to sham or verum stimulation, received 15 sessions of iTBS over the left prefrontal cortex (PFC) in addition to 9 weeks of group CBT. Cortical activity during a cognitive as well as an emotional (Emotional Stroop) paradigm was assessed both at baseline and post-iTBS treatment using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and compared to healthy controls. Results In this manuscript we only report the results of the emotional paradigm; for the results of the cognitive paradigm please refer to Deppermann et al. (2014). During the Emotional Stroop test, PD patients showed significantly reduced activation to panic-related compared to neutral stimuli for the left PFC at baseline. Bilateral prefrontal activation for panic-related stimuli significantly increased after verum iTBS only. Clinical ratings significantly improved during CBT and remained stable at follow-up. However, no clinical differences between the verum- and sham-stimulated group were identified, except for a more stable reduction of agoraphobic avoidance during follow-up in the verum iTBS group. Limitations Limitations include insufficient blinding, the missing control for possible state-dependent iTBS effects, and the timing of iTBS application during CBT. Conclusion Prefrontal hypoactivity in PD patients was normalised by add-on iTBS. Clinical improvement of anxiety symptoms was not affected by iTBS., Highlights • For PD, PFC activation in response to panic-related stimuli is reduced. • Prefrontal brain activation for panic stimuli increased only after verum rTMS. • Anxiety symptom ratings improved during rTMS/CBT in both rTMS groups. • Verum rTMS did not additionally improve clinical symptoms.

Highlights • No serious adverse effects have been reported in experiments using either tDCS or tACS. • Persistent adverse effects of tDCS are mainly skin problems; for tACS, none have been reported. • Further safety investigations are needed., Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) have been applied to many research issues because these stimulation techniques can modulate neural activity in the human brain painlessly and non-invasively with weak electrical currents. However, there are no formal safety guidelines for the selection of stimulus parameters in either tDCS or tACS. As a means of gathering the information that is needed to produce safety guidelines, in this article, we summarize the adverse events of tDCS and tACS. In both stimulation techniques, most adverse effects are mild and disappear soon after stimulation. Nevertheless, several papers have reported that, in tDCS, some adverse events persist even after stimulation. The persistent events consist of skin lesions similar to burns, which can arise even in healthy subjects, and mania or hypomania in patients with depression. Recently, one paper reported a pediatric patient presenting with seizure after tDCS, although the causal relationship between stimulation and seizure is not clear. As this seizure is the only serious adverse events yet reported in connection with tDCS, tDCS is considered safe. In tACS, meanwhile, no persistent adverse events have been reported, but considerably fewer reports are available on the safety of tACS than on the safety of tDCS. Therefore, to establish the safety of tDCS and tACS, we need to scan the literature continuously for information on the adverse events of both stimulation techniques. Further safety investigations are also required.

Functional, molecular and genetic neuroimaging has highlighted the existence of brain anomalies and neural vulnerability factors related to obesity and eating disorders such as binge eating or anorexia nervosa. In particular, decreased basal metabolism in the prefrontal cortex and striatum as well as dopaminergic alterations have been described in obese subjects, in parallel with increased activation of reward brain areas in response to palatable food cues. Elevated reward region responsivity may trigger food craving and predict future weight gain. This opens the way to prevention studies using functional and molecular neuroimaging to perform early diagnostics and to phenotype subjects at risk by exploring different neurobehavioral dimensions of the food choices and motivation processes. In the first part of this review, advantages and limitations of neuroimaging techniques, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), pharmacogenetic fMRI and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) will be discussed in the context of recent work dealing with eating behavior, with a particular focus on obesity. In the second part of the review, non-invasive strategies to modulate food-related brain processes and functions will be presented. At the leading edge of non-invasive brain-based technologies is real-time fMRI (rtfMRI) neurofeedback, which is a powerful tool to better understand the complexity of human brain–behavior relationships. rtfMRI, alone or when combined with other techniques and tools such as EEG and cognitive therapy, could be used to alter neural plasticity and learned behavior to optimize and/or restore healthy cognition and eating behavior. Other promising non-invasive neuromodulation approaches being explored are repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS). Converging evidence points at the value of these non-invasive neuromodulation strategies to study basic mechanisms underlying eating behavior and to treat its disorders. Both of these approaches will be compared in light of recent work in this field, while addressing technical and practical questions. The third part of this review will be dedicated to invasive neuromodulation strategies, such as vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS). In combination with neuroimaging approaches, these techniques are promising experimental tools to unravel the intricate relationships between homeostatic and hedonic brain circuits. Their potential as additional therapeutic tools to combat pharmacorefractory morbid obesity or acute eating disorders will be discussed, in terms of technical challenges, applicability and ethics. In a general discussion, we will put the brain at the core of fundamental research, prevention and therapy in the context of obesity and eating disorders. First, we will discuss the possibility to identify new biological markers of brain functions. Second, we will highlight the potential of neuroimaging and neuromodulation in individualized medicine. Third, we will introduce the ethical questions that are concomitant to the emergence of new neuromodulation therapies., Highlights • We review the neural vulnerability factors related to obesity and eating disorders. • We compare the pros and cons of neuroimaging techniques to study eating behavior. • We present non-invasive strategies to modulate food-related brain processes. • We also present invasive neuromodulation methods such as VNS and DBS. • We discuss about neuroimaging and neuromodulation for prevention and therapy.

Background: Swallowing problems following stroke may result in increased risk of aspiration pneumonia, malnutrition, and dehydration. Objective/hypothesis: Our hypothesis was that three neurostimulation techniques would produce beneficial effects on chronic dysphagia following stroke through a common brain mechanism that would predict behavioral response. Methods: In 18 dysphagic stroke patients (mean age: 66 ± 3 years, 3 female, time-post-stroke: 63 ± 15 weeks [±SD]), pharyngeal electromyographic responses were recorded after single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the pharyngeal motor cortex, to measure corticobulbar excitability before, immediately, and 30 min, after real and sham applications of neurostimulation. Patients were randomized to a single session of either: pharyngeal electrical stimulation (PES), paired associative stimulation (PAS) or repetitive TMS (rTMS). Penetration-aspiration scores and bolus transfer timings were assessed before and after both real and sham interventions using videofluoroscopy. Results: Corticobulbar excitability of pharyngeal motor cortex was beneficially modulated by PES, PAS and to a lesser extent by rTMS, with functionally relevant changes in the unaffected hemisphere. Following combining the results of real neurostimulation, an overall increase in corticobulbar excitability in the unaffected hemisphere (P = .005, F1,17 = 10.6, ANOVA) with an associated 15% reduction in aspiration (P = .005, z = −2.79) was observed compared to sham. Conclusions: In this mechanistic study, an increase in corticobulbar excitability the unaffected projection was correlated with the improvement in swallowing safety (P = .001, rho = −.732), but modality-specific differences were observed. Paradigms providing peripheral input favored change in neurophysiological and behavioral outcome measures in chronic dysphagia patients. Further larger cohort studies of neurostimulation in chronic dysphagic stroke are imperative.