1 Hz rTMS preconditioned by tDCS over the primary motor cortex in Parkinson’s disease: effects on bradykinesia of arm and hand

Harnessing Brainwave Entrainment: A Non-invasive Strategy To Alleviate Neurological Disorder Symptoms

From 1990-2019, the burden of neurological disorders varied considerably across countries and regions. Psychiatric disorders, often emerging in early to mid-adulthood, are linked to late-life neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease. Individuals with conditions such as Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, and Bipolar Disorder face up to four times higher risk of developing neurodegenerative disorders. Contrarily, 65 % of those with neurodegenerative conditions experience severe psychiatric symptoms during their illness. Further, the limitation of medical resources continues to make this burden a significant global and local challenge. Therefore, brainwave entrainment provides therapeutic avenues for improving the symptoms of diseases. Brainwaves are rhythmic oscillations produced either spontaneously or in response to stimuli. Key brainwave patterns include gamma, beta, alpha, theta, and delta waves, yet the underlying physiological mechanisms and the brain's ability to shift between these dynamic states remain areas for further exploration. In neurological disorders, brainwaves are often disrupted, a phenomenon termed "oscillopathy". However, distinguishing these impaired oscillations from the natural variability in brainwave activity across different regions and functional states poses significant challenges. Brainwave-mediated therapeutics represents a promising research field aimed at correcting dysfunctional oscillations. Herein, we discuss a range of non-invasive techniques such as non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), neurologic music therapy (NMT), gamma stimulation, and somatosensory interventions using light, sound, and visual stimuli. These approaches, with their minimal side effects and cost-effectiveness, offer potential therapeutic benefits. When integrated, they may not only help in delaying disease progression but also contribute to the development of innovative medical devices for neurological care.

Clinical neurophysiology in the treatment of movement disorders: IFCN handbook chapter

In this review, different aspects of the use of clinical neurophysiology techniques for the treatment of movement disorders are addressed. First of all, these techniques can be used to guide neuromodulation techniques or to perform therapeutic neuromodulation as such. Neuromodulation includes invasive techniques based on the surgical implantation of electrodes and a pulse generator, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) or spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on the one hand, and non-invasive techniques aimed at modulating or even lesioning neural structures by transcranial application. Movement disorders are one of the main areas of indication for the various neuromodulation techniques. This review focuses on the following techniques: DBS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), low-intensity transcranial electrical stimulation, including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), and focused ultrasound (FUS), including high-intensity magnetic resonance-guided FUS (MRgFUS), and pulsed mode low-intensity transcranial FUS stimulation (TUS). The main clinical conditions in which neuromodulation has proven its efficacy are Parkinson's disease, dystonia, and essential tremor, mainly using DBS or MRgFUS. There is also some evidence for Tourette syndrome (DBS), Huntington's disease (DBS), cerebellar ataxia (tDCS), and axial signs (SCS) and depression (rTMS) in PD. The development of non-invasive transcranial neuromodulation techniques is limited by the short-term clinical impact of these techniques, especially rTMS, in the context of very chronic diseases. However, at-home use (tDCS) or current advances in the design of closed-loop stimulation (tACS) may open new perspectives for the application of these techniques in patients, favored by their easier use and lower rate of adverse effects compared to invasive or lesioning methods. Finally, this review summarizes the evidence for keeping the use of electromyography to optimize the identification of muscles to be treated with botulinum toxin injection, which is indicated and widely performed for the treatment of various movement disorders.

Preconditioning prefrontal connectivity using transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have been shown to modulate functional connectivity. Their specific effects seem to be dependent on the pre-existing neuronal state. We aimed to precondition frontal networks using tDCS and subsequently stimulate the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (lDLPFC) using TMS. Thirty healthy participants underwent excitatory, inhibitory, or sham tDCS for 10 min, as well as an excitatory intermittent theta-burst (iTBS) protocol (600 pulses, 190 s, 20 × 2-s trains), applied over the lDLPFC at 90% of the individual resting motor threshold. Functional connectivity was measured in three task-free resting state fMRI sessions, immediately before and after tDCS, as well as after iTBS. Testing the whole design did not yield any significant results. Analysis of the connectivity between the stimulation site and all other brain voxels, contrasting only the interaction effect between the experimental groups (excitatory vs. inhibitory) and the repeated measure (post-tDCS vs. post-TMS), revealed significantly affected voxels bilaterally in the anterior cingulate and paracingulate gyri, the caudate nuclei, the insula and operculum cortices, as well as the Heschl’s gyrus. Post-hoc ROI-to-ROI analyses between the significant clusters and the striatum showed post-tDCS, temporo-parietal-to-striatal and temporo-parietal-to-fronto-cingulate differences between the anodal and cathodal tDCSgroup, as well as post-TMS, striatal-to-temporo-parietal differences between the anodal and cathodal groups and frontostriatal and interhemispheric temporo-parietal cathodal-sham group differences. Excitatory iTBS to a tDCS-inhibited lDLPFC thus yielded more robust functional connectivity to various areas as compared to excitatory iTBS to a tDCS-enhanced DLPFC. Even considering reduced statistical power due to low subject numbers, results demonstrate complex, whole-brain stimulation effects. They are possibly facilitated by cortical homeostatic control mechanisms and show the feasibility of using tDCS to modulate subsequent TMS effects. This proof-of-principle study might stimulate further research into the principle of preconditioning that might be useful in the development of protocols using DLPFC as a stimulation site for the treatment of depression.

Reaching and Grasping Movements in Parkinson's Disease: A Review

Parkinson's disease (PD) is known to affect the brain motor circuits involving the basal ganglia (BG) and to induce, among other signs, general slowness and paucity of movements. In upper limb movements, PD patients show a systematic prolongation of movement duration while maintaining a sufficient level of endpoint accuracy. PD appears to cause impairments not only in movement execution, but also in movement initiation and planning, as revealed by abnormal preparatory activity of motor-related brain areas. Grasping movement is affected as well, particularly in the coordination of the hand aperture with the transport phase. In the last fifty years, numerous behavioral studies attempted to clarify the mechanisms underlying these anomalies, speculating on the plausible role that the BG-thalamo-cortical circuitry may play in normal and pathological motor control. Still, many questions remain open, especially concerning the management of the speed-accuracy tradeoff and the online feedback control. In this review, we summarize the literature results on reaching and grasping in parkinsonian patients. We analyze the relevant hypotheses on the origins of dysfunction, by focusing on the motor control aspects involved in the different movement phases and the corresponding role played by the BG. We conclude with an insight into the innovative stimulation techniques and computational models recently proposed, which might be helpful in further clarifying the mechanisms through which PD affects reaching and grasping movements.

Tolerability and Blinding of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in People with Parkinson's Disease: A Critical Review

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is accompanied by transient sensations (e.g., tingling, itching, burning), which may affect treatment outcomes or break the blinding of the study protocol. Assessing tolerability and blinding is integral to providing ample evidence of a "real effect" from the applied stimulation and dispelling the possibility of placebo effects. People with Parkinson's disease (PwPD) endure many motor and non-motor symptoms that might be amenable to tDCS. However, because the disease also affects sensation capabilities, these subjects might report tolerability and blinding differently than other cohorts. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to aggregate the tolerability and blinding reports of tDCS studies in PwPD and recommend a standard tolerability and blinding reporting practice. A literature search of the PubMed and Scopus databases from 1 January 2020 to 1 April 2020 was performed to identify publications that applied tDCS to PwPD. Seventy studies were potentially reviewable, but only 36 (nine with quantitative tolerability reports, 20 with qualitative tolerability reports, and seven that only reported blinding) provided sufficient information to be included in the review. Quantitative information on tDCS tolerability and blinding maintenance in PwPD is scarce, and future reviews and metanalyses should carefully consider the possibility of placebo effects in their included studies.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) to Improve Gait in Multiple Sclerosis: A Timing Window Comparison

Unilateral weakness of the lower limb is a hallmark of multiple sclerosis (MS) and a significant contributor to the progressive worsening of walking ability. There are currently no effective rehabilitation strategies targeting strength asymmetries and/or gait impairments in people with MS (PwMS). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has improved motor outcomes in various populations, but the effect of tDCS on gait in PwMS and the ideal timing window of tDCS application are still unknown. This study investigated the effects of tDCS, either before or during a 6 min walk test (6MWT), on the distance walked and gait characteristics in PwMS. Twelve participants were recruited and randomly assigned into BEFORE or DURING groups (both n = 6). The BEFORE group received stimulation before performing a 6MWT (sham/2 mA, 13 min). The DURING group received stimulation only during a 6MWT (sham/2 mA, 6 min). Stimulation was over the more MS-affected primary motor cortex (M1). Distance walked and gait characteristics of the walk were the primary and secondary outcomes. The results indicated a significant decrease in distance walked in the DURING group (p = 0.026) and a significant increase in gait velocity in the BEFORE group (p = 0.04). These changes were accompanied by trends (p < 0.1) in distance walked, gait velocity, and stride length. Overall, the results of this study suggest that tDCS performed before a 6MWT might be more effective than tDCS during a 6MWT and that a single session of tDCS may not be sufficient to influence gait. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier #NCT03757819.

Oscillations in cortico-basal ganglia circuits: implications for Parkinson’s disease and other neurologic and psychiatric conditions

Cortico-basal ganglia circuits are thought to play a crucial role in the selection and control of motor behaviors and have also been implicated in the processing of motivational content and in higher cognitive functions. During the last two decades, electrophysiological recordings in basal ganglia circuits have shown that several disease conditions are associated with specific changes in the temporal patterns of neuronal activity. In particular, synchronized oscillations have been a frequent finding suggesting that excessive synchronization of neuronal activity may be a pathophysiological mechanism involved in a wide range of neurologic and psychiatric conditions. We here review the experimental support for this hypothesis primarily in relation to Parkinson’s disease but also in relation to dystonia, essential tremor, epilepsy, and psychosis/schizophrenia.

Transcranial direct current stimulation associated with gait training in Parkinson's disease: A pilot randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with cueing gait training (CGT) on functional mobility in patients with Parkinson´s disease (PD).

METHODS

A pilot double-blind controlled, randomized clinical trial was conducted with 22 patients with PD assigned to the experimental (anodal tDCS plus CGT) and control group (sham tDCS plus CGT). The primary outcome (functional mobility) was assessed by 10-m walk test, cadence, stride length, and Timed Up and Go test. Motor impairment, bradykinesia, balance, and quality of life were analyzed as secondary outcomes. Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) were observed when assessing outcome data.

RESULTS

Both groups demonstrated similar gains in all outcome measures, except for the stride length. The number of participants who showed MCID was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

The CGT provided many benefits to functional mobility, motor impairment, bradykinesia, balance, and quality of life. However, these effect magnitudes were not influenced by stimulation, but tDCS seems to prolong the effects of cueing therapy on functional mobility.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

A group of European experts was commissioned by the European Chapter of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology to gather knowledge about the state of the art of the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) from studies published up until September 2016, regarding pain, Parkinson's disease, other movement disorders, motor stroke, poststroke aphasia, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, Alzheimer's disease, tinnitus, depression, schizophrenia, and craving/addiction. The evidence-based analysis included only studies based on repeated tDCS sessions with sham tDCS control procedure; 25 patients or more having received active treatment was required for Class I, while a lower number of 10-24 patients was accepted for Class II studies. Current evidence does not allow making any recommendation of Level A (definite efficacy) for any indication. Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for: (i) anodal tDCS of the left primary motor cortex (M1) (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in fibromyalgia; (ii) anodal tDCS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in major depressive episode without drug resistance; (iii) anodal tDCS of the right DLPFC (with left DLPFC cathode) in addiction/craving. Level C recommendation (possible efficacy) is proposed for anodal tDCS of the left M1 (or contralateral to pain side, with right orbitofrontal cathode) in chronic lower limb neuropathic pain secondary to spinal cord lesion. Conversely, Level B recommendation (probable inefficacy) is conferred on the absence of clinical effects of: (i) anodal tDCS of the left temporal cortex (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in tinnitus; (ii) anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in drug-resistant major depressive episode. It remains to be clarified whether the probable or possible therapeutic effects of tDCS are clinically meaningful and how to optimally perform tDCS in a therapeutic setting. In addition, the easy management and low cost of tDCS devices allow at home use by the patient, but this might raise ethical and legal concerns with regard to potential misuse or overuse. We must be careful to avoid inappropriate applications of this technique by ensuring rigorous training of the professionals and education of the patients.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for idiopathic Parkinson's disease

BACKGROUND

Idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD) is a neurodegenerative disorder, with the severity of the disability usually increasing with disease duration. IPD affects patients' health-related quality of life, disability, and impairment. Current rehabilitation approaches have limited effectiveness in improving outcomes in patients with IPD, but a possible adjunct to rehabilitation might be non-invasive brain stimulation by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate cortical excitability, and hence to improve these outcomes in IPD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of tDCS in improving motor and non-motor symptoms in people with IPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases (until February 2016): the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library ; 2016 , Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Science Citation Index, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Rehabdata, and Inspec. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched trial registers and reference lists, handsearched conference proceedings, and contacted authors and equipment manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and randomised controlled cross-over trials that compared tDCS versus control in patients with IPD for improving health-related quality of life , disability, and impairment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality (JM and MP) and extracted data (BE and JM). If necessary, we contacted study authors to ask for additional information. We collected information on dropouts and adverse events from the trial reports.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials with a total of 137 participants. We found two studies with 45 participants examining the effects of tDCS compared to control (sham tDCS) on our primary outcome measure, impairment, as measured by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). There was very low quality evidence for no effect of tDCS on change in global UPDRS score ( mean difference (MD) -7.10 %, 95% confidence interval (CI -19.18 to 4.97; P = 0.25, I² = 21%, random-effects model). However, there was evidence of an effect on UPDRS part III motor subsection score at the end of the intervention phase (MD -14.43%, 95% CI -24.68 to -4.18; P = 0.006, I² = 2%, random-effects model; very low quality evidence). One study with 25 participants measured the reduction in off and on time with dyskinesia, but there was no evidence of an effect (MD 0.10 hours, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.34; P = 0.41, I² = 0%, random-effects model; and MD 0.00 hours, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.12; P = 1, I² = 0%, random- effects model, respectively; very low quality evidence).Two trials with a total of 41 participants measured gait speed using measures of timed gait at the end of the intervention phase, revealing no evidence of an effect ( standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.50, 95% CI -0.17 to 1.18; P = 0.14, I² = 11%, random-effects model; very low quality evidence). Another secondary outcome was health-related quality of life and we found one study with 25 participants reporting on the physical health and mental health aspects of health-related quality of life (MD 1.00 SF-12 score, 95% CI -5.20 to 7.20; I² = 0%, inverse variance method with random-effects model; very low quality evidence; and MD 1.60 SF-12 score, 95% CI -5.08 to 8.28; I² = 0%, inverse variance method with random-effects model; very low quality evidence, respectively). We found no study examining the effects of tDCS for improving activities of daily living. In two of six studies, dropouts , adverse events, or deaths occurring during the intervention phase were reported. There was insufficient evidence that dropouts , adverse effects, or deaths were higher with intervention (risk difference (RD) 0.04, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.12; P = 0.40, I² = 0%, random-effects model; very low quality evidence).We found one trial with a total of 16 participants examining the effects of tDCS plus movement therapy compared to control (sham tDCS) plus movement therapy on our secondary outcome, gait speed at the end of the intervention phase, revealing no evidence of an effect (MD 0.05 m/s, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.25; inverse variance method with random-effects model; very low quality evidence). We found no evidence of an effect regarding differences in dropouts and adverse effects between intervention and control groups (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.21; Mantel-Haenszel method with random-effects model; very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to determine the effects of tDCS for reducing off time ( when the symptoms are not controlled by the medication) and on time with dyskinesia ( time that symptoms are controlled but the person still experiences involuntary muscle movements ) , and for improving health- related quality of life, disability, and impairment in patients with IPD. Evidence of very low quality indicates no difference in dropouts and adverse events between tDCS and control groups.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)

A group of European experts was commissioned to establish guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) from evidence published up until March 2014, regarding pain, movement disorders, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, tinnitus, depression, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, craving/addiction, and conversion. Despite unavoidable inhomogeneities, there is a sufficient body of evidence to accept with level A (definite efficacy) the analgesic effect of high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the pain and the antidepressant effect of HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). A Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for the antidepressant effect of low-frequency (LF) rTMS of the right DLPFC, HF-rTMS of the left DLPFC for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, and LF-rTMS of contralesional M1 in chronic motor stroke. The effects of rTMS in a number of indications reach level C (possible efficacy), including LF-rTMS of the left temporoparietal cortex in tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. It remains to determine how to optimize rTMS protocols and techniques to give them relevance in routine clinical practice. In addition, professionals carrying out rTMS protocols should undergo rigorous training to ensure the quality of the technical realization, guarantee the proper care of patients, and maximize the chances of success. Under these conditions, the therapeutic use of rTMS should be able to develop in the coming years.

Is neuroenhancement by noninvasive brain stimulation a net zero-sum proposition?

In the past several years, the number of studies investigating enhancement of cognitive functions through noninvasive brain stimulation (NBS) has increased considerably. NBS techniques, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial current stimulation, seem capable of enhancing cognitive functions in patients and in healthy humans, particularly when combined with other interventions, including pharmacologic, behavioral and cognitive therapies. The "net zero-sum model", based on the assumption that brain resources are subjected to the physical principle of conservation of energy, is one of the theoretical frameworks proposed to account for such enhancement of function and its potential cost. We argue that to guide future neuroenhancement studies, the net-zero sum concept is helpful, but only if its limits are tightly defined.

Motor cortical plasticity in Parkinson's disease

In Parkinson's disease (PD), there are alterations of the basal ganglia (BG) thalamocortical networks, primarily due to degeneration of nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons. These changes in subcortical networks lead to plastic changes in primary motor cortex (M1), which mediates cortical motor output and is a potential target for treatment of PD. Studies investigating the motor cortical plasticity using non-invasive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have found altered plasticity in PD, but there are inconsistencies among these studies. This is likely because plasticity depends on many factors such as the extent of dopaminergic loss and disease severity, response to dopaminergic replacement therapies, development of l-DOPA-induced dyskinesias (LID), the plasticity protocol used, medication, and stimulation status in patients treated with deep brain stimulation (DBS). The influences of LID and DBS on BG and M1 plasticity have been explored in animal models and in PD patients. In addition, many other factors such age, genetic factors (e.g., brain derived neurotropic factor and other neurotransmitters or receptors polymorphism), emotional state, time of the day, physical fitness have been documented to play role in the extent of plasticity induced by TMS in human studies. In this review, we summarize the studies that investigated M1 plasticity in PD and demonstrate how these afore-mentioned factors affect motor cortical plasticity in PD. We conclude that it is important to consider the clinical, demographic, and technical factors that influence various plasticity protocols while developing these protocols as diagnostic or prognostic tools in PD. We also discuss how the modulation of cortical excitability and the plasticity with these non-invasive brain stimulation techniques facilitate the understanding of the pathophysiology of PD and help design potential therapeutic possibilities in this disorder.

Transcranial direct-current stimulation increases extracellular dopamine levels in the rat striatum

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive procedure that achieves polarity-dependent modulation of neuronal membrane potentials. It has recently been used as a functional intervention technique for the treatment of psychiatric and neurological diseases; however, its neuronal mechanisms have not been fully investigated in vivo.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

To investigate whether the application of cathodal or anodal tDCS affects extracellular dopamine and serotonin levels in the rat striatum.

METHODS

Stimulation and in vivo microdialysis were carried out under urethane anesthesia, and microdialysis probes were slowly inserted into the striatum. After the collection of baseline fractions in the rat striatum, cathodal or anodal tDCS was applied continuously for 10 min with a current intensity of 800 μA from an electrode placed on the skin of the scalp. Dialysis samples were collected every 10 min until at least 400 min after the onset of stimulation.

RESULTS

Following the application of cathodal, but not anodal, tDCS for 10 min, extracellular dopamine levels increased for more than 400 min in the striatum. There were no significant changes in extracellular serotonin levels.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that tDCS has a direct and/or indirect effect on the dopaminergic system in the rat basal ganglia.

Safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation in Parkinson's disease: a review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been used in both physiological studies and, more recently, the therapy of Parkinson's disease (PD). Prior TMS studies in healthy subjects and other patient populations demonstrate a slight risk of seizures and other adverse events. Our goal was to estimate these risks and document other safety concerns specific to PD patients.

METHODS

We performed an English-Language literature search through PudMed to review all TMS studies involving PD patients. We documented any seizures or other adverse events associated with these studies. Crude risks were calculated per subject and per session of TMS.

RESULTS

We identified 84 single pulse (spTMS) and/or paired-pulse (ppTMS) TMS studies involving 1091 patients and 77 repetitive TMS (rTMS) studies involving 1137 patients. Risk of adverse events was low in all protocols. spTMS and ppTMS risk per patient for any adverse event was 0.0018 (95% CI: 0.0002-0.0066) per patient and no seizures were encountered. Risk of an adverse event from rTMS was 0.040 (95% CI: 0.029-0.053) per patient and no seizures were reported. Other adverse events included transient headaches, scalp pain, tinnitus, nausea, increase in pre-existing pain, and muscle jerks. Transient worsening of Parkinsonian symptoms was noted in one study involving rTMS of the supplementary motor area (SMA).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that current TMS and rTMS protocols do not pose significant risks to PD patients. We would recommend that TMS users in this population follow the most recent safety guidelines but do not warrant additional precautions.

Synaptic plasticity in neurodegenerative diseases evaluated and modulated by in vivo neurophysiological techniques

Several studies demonstrated in experimental models and in humans synaptic plasticity impairment in some neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric diseases such as Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease, and schizophrenia. Recently new neurophysiological tools, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation, have been introduced in experimental and clinical settings for studying physiology of the brain and modulating cortical activity. These techniques use noninvasive transcranial electrical or magnetic stimulation to modulate neurons activity in the human brain. Cortical stimulation might enhance or inhibit the activity of cortico-subcortical networks, depending on stimulus frequency and intensity, current polarity, and other stimulation parameters such as the configuration of the induced electric field and stimulation protocols. On this basis, in the last two decades, these techniques have rapidly become valuable tools to investigate physiology of the human brain and have been applied to treat drug-resistant neurological and psychiatric diseases. Here we describe these techniques and discuss the mechanisms that may explain these effects.

Current and future options for the management of phantom-limb pain

Phantom-limb pain (PLP) belongs among difficult-to-treat chronic pain syndromes. Treatment options for PLP are to a large degree implicated by the level of understanding the mechanisms and nature of PLP. Research and clinical findings acknowledge the neuropathic nature of PLP and also suggest that both peripheral as well as central mechanisms, including neuroplastic changes in central nervous system, can contribute to PLP. Neuroimaging studies in PLP have indicated a relation between PLP and the neuroplastic changes. Further, it has been shown that the pathological neuroplastic changes could be reverted, and there is a parallel between an improvement (reversal) of the neuroplastic changes in PLP and pain relief. These findings facilitated explorations of novel neuromodulatory treatment strategies, adding to the variety of treatment approaches in PLP. Overall, available treatment options in PLP include pharmacological treatment, supportive non-pharmacological non-invasive strategies (eg, neuromodulation using transcranial magnetic stimulation, visual feedback therapy, or motor imagery; peripheral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, physical therapy, reflexology, or various psychotherapeutic approaches), and invasive treatment strategies (eg, surgical destructive procedures, nerve blocks, or invasive neuromodulation using deep brain stimulation, motor cortex stimulation, or spinal cord stimulation). Venues of further development in PLP management include a technological and methodological improvement of existing treatment methods, an implementation of new techniques and products, and a development of new treatment approaches.

A randomized, double-blind trial of transcranial electrostimulation in early Parkinson's disease

We studied the effects of noninvasive transcranial electrical stimulation on the motor and psychological symptoms of early Parkinson's disease. Twenty-three subjects were treated with 10 days of placebo versus active treatment and then followed for 14 weeks. Baseline off medication Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale parts I-III was 29.4 ± 10.0. The primary end point, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale in week 2 following treatment, reduced by 5.3 ± 9.7 for those in active treatment and 7.7 ± 4.8 for those receiving placebo (not significant). Similarly, no significant differences were seen in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale, and Epworth Sleepiness Scale over the duration of the study. The treatment was well tolerated without device-related adverse events. Despite the negative study, nonpharmacological approaches should continue to be pursued in Parkinson's disease, as they are generally well received by patients.