Effects of High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Primary Motor Cortex on Cold Pain Sensitivity Among Healthy Adults

Lack of effects of online HD-tDCS over the left or right DLPFC in an associative memory and metamemory monitoring task

Neuroimaging studies have shown that activity in the prefrontal cortex correlates with two critical aspects of normal memory functioning: retrieval of episodic memories and subjective "feelings-of-knowing" about our memory. Brain stimulation can be used to test the causal role of the prefrontal cortex in these processes, and whether the role differs for the left versus right prefrontal cortex. We compared the effects of online High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS) over the left or right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) compared to sham during a proverb-name associative memory and feeling-of-knowing task. There were no significant effects of HD-tDCS on either associative recognition or feeling-of-knowing performance, with Bayesian analyses showing moderate support for the null hypotheses. Despite past work showing effects of HD-tDCS on other memory and feeling-of-knowing tasks, and neuroimaging showing effects with similar tasks, these findings add to the literature of non-significant effects with tDCS. This work highlights the need to better understand factors that determine the effectiveness of tDCS, especially if tDCS is to have a successful future as a clinical intervention.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Effects on Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) and Nociceptive Processing in Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to determine the effect that different tDCS protocols have on pain processing in healthy people, assessed using quantitative sensory tests (QST) and evoked pain intensity.

METHODS

We systematically searched in EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Articles on tDCS on a healthy population and regarding QST, such as pressure pain thresholds (PPT), heat pain thresholds (HPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), or evoked pain intensity were selected. Quality was analyzed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and PEDro scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis and sixteen in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in PPTs between tDCS and sham, but differences were observed when applying tDCS over S1 in PPTs compared to sham. Significant differences in CPTs were observed between tDCS and sham over DLPFC and differences in pain intensity were observed between tDCS and sham over M1. Non-significant effects were found for the effects of tDCS on HPTs.

CONCLUSION

tDCS anodic over S1 stimulation increases PPTs, while a-tDCS over DLPFC affects CPTs. The HPTs with tDCS are worse. Finally, M1 a-tDCS seems to reduce evoked pain intensity in healthy subjects.

Effects of High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Targeting the Anterior Cingulate Cortex on the Pain Thresholds: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The majority of existing clinical studies used active transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over superficial areas of the pain neuromatrix to regulate pain, with conflicting results. Few studies have investigated the effect of tDCS on pain thresholds by focusing on targets in deep parts of the pain neuromatrix.

METHODS

This study applied a single session of high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) targeting the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and used a parallel and sham-controlled design to compare the antinociceptive effects in healthy individuals by assessing changes in pain thresholds. Sixty-six female individuals (mean age, 20.5 ± 2.4 years) were randomly allocated into the anodal, cathodal, or sham HD-tDCS groups. The primary outcome of the study was pain thresholds (pressure pain threshold, heat pain threshold, and cold pain threshold), which were evaluated before and after stimulation through the use of quantitative sensory tests.

RESULTS

Only cathodal HD-tDCS targeting the ACC significantly increased heat pain threshold (P < 0.05) and pressure pain threshold (P < 0.01) in healthy individuals compared with sham stimulation. Neither anodal nor cathodal HD-tDCS showed significant analgesic effects on cold pain threshold. Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was found in pain thresholds between anodal and sham HD-tDCS (P > 0.38). Independent of HD-tDCS protocols, the positive and negative affective schedule scores were decreased immediately after stimulation compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study has found that cathodal HD-tDCS targeting the ACC provided a strong antinociceptive effect (increase in pain threshold), demonstrating a positive biological effect of HD-tDCS.

Single Session Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Different Cortical Areas

Abstract. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies in healthy volunteers have shown conflicting results in terms of modulation in pain thresholds. The aim of this study was to investigate how single session anodal tDCS and modulated tDCS (mtDCS) of distinct cortical areas affected pain and perception thresholds in healthy participants. Five different stimulation conditions were applied at different cortical sites to 20 healthy volunteers to investigate the effects of tDCS and mtDCS (20 Hz) on pain and perception thresholds. TDCS over the motor cortex (M1), mtDCS over the motor cortex, tDCS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), mtDCS of the DLPFC, and mtDCS over the occipital cortex were the stimulation conditions. All of the stimulations were anodal. The stimulations were given in a randomized order at 20-minute intervals. For comparison, electrical pain and perception thresholds were obtained from the right middle finger before and during the tDCS. After each measurement, participants were asked to give a score to their pain. In repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) test, the Condition × Time interaction showed no significant influence on changes in pain, perception thresholds, and pain scores ( p = .48, p = .89, and p = .50, respectively). However, regardless of the condition types, there was a significant difference in pain and perceptual thresholds during tDCS ( p = .01, p = .025, respectively). Our findings did not support difference in pain and perception modulation by a single session anodal tDCS over M1 and DLPFC compared to the occipital cortex in healthy volunteers. The increase in all thresholds during tDCS, irrespective of conditions, and peripheral sensations, including an active control group, taken together, suggest a placebo effect of active tDCS. Future studies about pain and perception in healthy subjects should consider the level of experimental pain and a strong placebo effect.