<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Up to 30% of patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), especially combat veterans, remain refractory to conventional treatment. For them, deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been suggested. Here, we review the literature on animal models of PTSD in which DBS has been used to treat PTSD-type behavior, and we review and discuss patient reports of DBS for PTSD. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A broad search was performed to find experimental animal articles and clinical reports on PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO, using combinations and variations of search words pertinent to DBS and PTSD. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The search yielded 30 articles, 24 on DBS in rat models of PTSD, and 6 publications between 2016 and 2020 reporting on a total of 3 patients. DBS in rat models targeted 4 brain areas: medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), ventral striatum, amygdala, and hippocampus. Clinical publications reported on 2 male combat veterans who received DBS in basolateral amygdala, and 1 female with PTSD due to domestic abuse, who received DBS of mPFC. All 3 patients benefitted to various extents from DBS, at follow-ups of 4 years, 6 months, and 7 months, respectively. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> PTSD is the only potential clinical indication for DBS that shows extensive animal research <i>prior</i> to human applications. Nevertheless, DBS for PTSD remains highly investigational. Despite several years of government funding of DBS research in view of treating severe PTSD in combat veterans, ethical dilemmas, recruitment difficulties, and issues related to use of DBS in such a complex and heterogenous disorder remain prevalent.

Do facial expressions of emotion influence us when not consciously perceived? Methods to investigate this question have typically relied on brief presentation of static images. In contrast, real facial expressions are dynamic and unfold over several seconds. Recent studies demonstrate that gaze contingent crowding (GCC) can block awareness of dynamic expressions while still inducing behavioural priming effects. The current experiment tested for the first time whether dynamic facial expressions presented using this method can induce unconscious facial activation. Videos of dynamic happy and angry expressions were presented outside participants' conscious awareness while EMG measurements captured activation of the zygomaticus major (active when smiling) and the corrugator supercilii (active when frowning). Forced-choice classification of expressions confirmed they were not consciously perceived, while EMG revealed significant differential activation of facial muscles consistent with the expressions presented. This successful demonstration opens new avenues for research examining the unconscious emotional influences of facial expressions.