Frequency-dependent modulation of cerebellar excitability during the application of non-invasive alternating current stimulation

Spampinato, Danny; Avci, Esin; Rothwell, John C.; Rocchi, Lorenzo

doi:10.1016/j.brs.2021.01.007

Cited by 26 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…TACS has already been used for cerebellar stimulation with frequencies ranging from 5 Hz to 300 Hz with different results (Naro et al, 2016(Naro et al, , 2017Miyaguchi et al, 2019Miyaguchi et al, , 2020Wessel et al, 2020;Schubert et al, 2021;Spampinato et al, 2021). One reason for using different frequencies is related to the fact that different target cell populations have different oscillatory properties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebellar transcranial current stimulation – An intraindividual comparison of different techniques

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial current stimulation (tCS) techniques have been shown to induce cortical plasticity. As an important relay in the motor system, the cerebellum is an interesting target for plasticity induction using tCS, aiming to modulate its excitability and connectivity. However, until now it remains unclear, which is the most effective tCS method for inducing plasticity in the cerebellum. Thus, in this study, the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), 50 Hz transcranial alternating current stimulation (50 Hz tACS), and high frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) were compared with sham stimulation in 20 healthy subjects in a within-subject design. tCS was applied targeting the cerebellar lobe VIIIA using neuronavigation. We measured corticospinal excitability, short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI), and cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI) and performed a sensor-based movement analysis at baseline and three times after the intervention (post1 = 15 min; post2 = 55 min; post3 = 95 min). Corticospinal excitability increased following cerebellar tACS and tRNS compared to sham stimulation. This effect was most pronounced directly after stimulation but lasted for at least 55 min after tACS. Cortico-cortical and cerebello-cortical conditioning protocols, as well as sensor-based movement analyses, did not change. Our findings suggest that cerebellar 50 Hz tACS is the most effective protocol to change corticospinal excitability.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebellar transcranial current stimulation – An intraindividual comparison of different techniques

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In principal accordance, we conducted feasibility testing of fNIRS in young and healthy subjects to drive (phase amplitude coupling) cerebellar transcranial alternating current stimulation (ctACS) at 4Hz using infra-slow (0.01-0.10 Hz) PFC HbO activity. Here, fNIRS-driven 4Hz ctACS is expected to facilitate cerebellar brain inhibition [6] better than ctDCS that we measured using fNIRS [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Indeed, tDCS can have effects on different cell populations in the cerebellar cortex that together will generate the effect which will be difficult to predict [22]. However, ctACS at the theta band frequency can increase the inhibitory tone that the cerebellum exerts over cerebrum due to selective recruitment of cerebellar granule cells and Golgi cells [6]. This modulation of the parallel fibre-Purkinje cell can lead to the modulation of the HbO activity at PFC that is then driving the ctACS via a phase amplitude coupling.…”

Section: Fnirs Hbo Response To Ctdcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) of posterolateral cerebellum and prefrontal cortex for fNIRS-driven cerebellar tES

Singh¹,

Kumar²,

Walia³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract—Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) has been shown to facilitate standing balance in stroke survivors where a good general linear model fit was found in the latent space between the mean lobular ctDCS electric field strength with the oxy-hemoglobin concentrations (HbO) from functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and log10-transformed electroencephalogram (EEG) bandpower at the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and the sensorimotor cortex in the responders. Recent works have also found that the infra-slow activity (0.01–0.10 Hz) and delta band (0.5–4 Hz) activity propagated in opposite directions between the cerebellum and cerebral cortex. Therefore, in this study, we tested the feasibility of fNIRS of cerebellum and PFC where infra-slow (0.01–0.10 Hz) PFC HbO activity was used to drive (phase amplitude coupling) 4Hz cerebellar transcranial alternating current stimulation (ctACS) at right lobules VI-CrusI/II-VIIb. We found that 2mA ctDCS evoked similar HbO response across cerebellum and PFC brain regions (a=0.01); however, 2mA ctACS evoked HbO across brain regions that was statistically different (a=0.01). Clinical Relevance—We showed the feasibility of fNIRS of cerebellum and PFC, and fNIRS-driven ctACS at 4Hz that may facilitate cognitive function via the frontoparietal network in cerebellar cognitive affective/Schmahmann syndrome.

show abstract

“…Indeed, tDCS can have effects on different cell populations that together will generate the effect which will be difficult to predict (Batsikadze et al, 2019) without grey-box modeling (Arora et al, 2021). Then, ctACS at the theta band frequency can increase the inhibitory tone that the cerebellum exerts over cerebrum due to postulated selective recruitment of cerebellar granule cells and Golgi cells (Spampinato et al, 2021). This modulation of the parallel fibre-Purkinje cell is postulated to lead to the modulation of the HbO activity at PFC that can then drive the ctACS via a phase amplitude coupling in our PFC phase-amplitude coupled ctACS approach -see Figure 7.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, fNIRSdriven 4Hz ctACS at ±2mA (max.) is expected to facilitate cerebellar brain inhibition (Spampinato et al, 2021) better than 2mA cerebellar tDCS (ctDCS) based on fNIRS imaging (Rezaee et al, 2021).…”

Section: Relevance Of Cerebellar Nibs In Cannabis Use Related Psychotic Disordermentioning

confidence: 99%

Portable Neuroimaging Guided Non-invasive Brain Stimulation of Cortico-cerebello-thalamo-cortical Loop in Substance Use Disorder

Walia¹,

Ghosh²,

Singh³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Maladaptive neuroplasticity related learned response in substance use disorder (SUD) can be ameliorated using non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS); however, inter-individual variability needs to be addressed for clinical translation. Objective: Our first objective was to develop a hypothesis for NIBS for learned response in SUD based on competing neurobehavioral decision systems model. Next objective was to conduct computational simulation of NIBS of cortico-cerebello-thalamo-cortical (CCTC) loop in cannabis use disorder (CUD) related dysfunctional “cue-reactivity” – a closely related construct of “craving” that is a core symptom. Our third objective was to test the feasibility of our neuroimaging guided rational NIBS approach in healthy humans. Methods: “Cue-reactivity” can be measured using behavioral paradigms and portable neuroimaging, including functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and electroencephalogram (EEG), metrics of sensorimotor gating. Therefore, we conducted computational simulation of NIBS, including transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation(tACS) of the cerebellar cortex and deep cerebellar nuclei(DCN), of the CCTC loop for its postulated effects on fNIRS and EEG metrics. We also developed a rational neuroimaging guided NIBS approach for cerebellar lobule (VII) and prefrontal cortex based on healthy human study. Results: Simulation study of cerebellar tDCS induced gamma oscillations in the cerebral cortex while tTIS induced gamma-to-beta frequency shift. Experimental fNIRS study found that 2mA cerebellar tDCS evoked similar oxyhemoglobin(HbO) response in-the-range of 5x10-6M across cerebellum and PFC brain regions (=0.01); however, infra-slow (0.01–0.10 Hz) prefrontal cortex HbO driven(phase-amplitude-coupling, PAC) 4Hz, ±2mA (max.) cerebellar tACS evoked HbO in-the-range of 10-7M that was statistically different (=0.01) across those brain regions. Conclusion: Our healthy human study showed the feasibility of fNIRS of cerebellum and PFC as well as fNIRS-driven ctACS at 4Hz that may facilitate cerebellar cognitive function via the frontoparietal network. Future work needs to combine fNIRS with EEG for multi-modal imaging.

show abstract

Frequency-dependent modulation of cerebellar excitability during the application of non-invasive alternating current stimulation

Cited by 26 publications

References 64 publications

Cerebellar transcranial current stimulation – An intraindividual comparison of different techniques

Cerebellar transcranial current stimulation – An intraindividual comparison of different techniques

Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) of posterolateral cerebellum and prefrontal cortex for fNIRS-driven cerebellar tES

Portable Neuroimaging Guided Non-invasive Brain Stimulation of Cortico-cerebello-thalamo-cortical Loop in Substance Use Disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About