Brunoni AR, Nitsche MA, Bolognini N, Bikson M, Wagner T, Merabet L, Edwards DJ, Valero-Cabre A, Rotenberg A, Pascual-Leone A, et al. Clinical research with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): challenges and future directions. Brain Stimul. 2012;5 (3) :175-95.
AbstractBACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique that delivers low-intensity, direct current to cortical areas facilitating or inhibiting spontaneous neuronal activity. In the past 10 years, tDCS physiologic mechanisms of action have been intensively investigated giving support for the investigation of its applications in clinical neuropsychiatry and rehabilitation. However, new methodologic, ethical, and regulatory issues emerge when translating the findings of preclinical and phase I studies into phase II and III clinical studies. The aim of this comprehensive review is to discuss the key challenges of this process and possible methods to address them. METHODS: We convened a workgroup of researchers in the field to review, discuss, and provide updates and key challenges of tDCS use in clinical research. MAIN FINDINGS/DISCUSSION: We reviewed several basic and clinical studies in the field and identified potential limitations, taking into account the particularities of the technique. We review and discuss the findings into four topics: (1) mechanisms of action of tDCS, parameters of use and computer-based human brain modeling investigating electric current fields and magnitude induced by tDCS; (2) methodologic aspects related to the clinical research of tDCS as divided according to study phase (ie, preclinical, phase I, phase II, and phase III studies); (3) ethical and regulatory concerns; and (4) future directions regarding novel approaches, novel devices, and future studies involving tDCS. Finally, we propose some alternative methods to facilitate clinical research on tDCS.
Plow EB, Obretenova SN, Fregni F, Pascual-Leone A, Merabet LB.
Comparison of visual field training for hemianopia with active versus sham transcranial direct cortical stimulation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26 (6) :616-26.
AbstractBACKGROUND: Vision Restoration Therapy (VRT) aims to improve visual field function by systematically training regions of residual vision associated with the activity of suboptimal firing neurons within the occipital cortex. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to modulate cortical excitability.
OBJECTIVE: Assess the possible efficacy of tDCS combined with VRT.
METHODS: The authors conducted a randomized, double-blind, demonstration-of-concept pilot study where participants were assigned to either VRT and tDCS or VRT and sham. The anode was placed over the occipital pole to target both affected and unaffected lobes. One hour training sessions were carried out 3 times per week for 3 months in a laboratory. Outcome measures included objective and subjective changes in visual field, recording of visual fixation performance, and vision-related activities of daily living (ADLs) and quality of life (QOL).
RESULTS: Although 12 participants were enrolled, only 8 could be analyzed. The VRT and tDCS group demonstrated significantly greater expansion in visual field and improvement on ADLs compared with the VRT and sham group. Contrary to expectations, subjective perception of visual field change was greater in the VRT and sham group. QOL did not change for either group. The observed changes in visual field were unrelated to compensatory eye movements, as shown with fixation monitoring.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of occipital cortical tDCS with visual field rehabilitation appears to enhance visual functional outcomes compared with visual rehabilitation alone. TDCS may enhance inherent mechanisms of plasticity associated with training.
Bikson M, Rahman A, Datta A, Fregni F, Merabet L.
High-resolution modeling assisted design of customized and individualized transcranial direct current stimulation protocols. Neuromodulation. 2012;15 (4) :306-15.
AbstractOBJECTIVES: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique that delivers low-intensity currents facilitating or inhibiting spontaneous neuronal activity. tDCS is attractive since dose is readily adjustable by simply changing electrode number, position, size, shape, and current. In the recent past, computational models have been developed with increased precision with the goal to help customize tDCS dose. The aim of this review is to discuss the incorporation of high-resolution patient-specific computer modeling to guide and optimize tDCS.
METHODS: In this review, we discuss the following topics: 1) The clinical motivation and rationale for models of transcranial stimulation is considered pivotal in order to leverage the flexibility of neuromodulation; 2) the protocols and the workflow for developing high-resolution models; 3) the technical challenges and limitations of interpreting modeling predictions; and 4) real cases merging modeling and clinical data illustrating the impact of computational models on the rational design of rehabilitative electrotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Though modeling for noninvasive brain stimulation is still in its development phase, it is predicted that with increased validation, dissemination, simplification, and democratization of modeling tools, computational forward models of neuromodulation will become useful tools to guide the optimization of clinical electrotherapy.
Merabet LB, Connors EC, Halko MA, Sánchez J.
Teaching the blind to find their way by playing video games. PLoS One. 2012;7 (9) :e44958.
AbstractComputer based video games are receiving great interest as a means to learn and acquire new skills. As a novel approach to teaching navigation skills in the blind, we have developed Audio-based Environment Simulator (AbES); a virtual reality environment set within the context of a video game metaphor. Despite the fact that participants were naïve to the overall purpose of the software, we found that early blind users were able to acquire relevant information regarding the spatial layout of a previously unfamiliar building using audio based cues alone. This was confirmed by a series of behavioral performance tests designed to assess the transfer of acquired spatial information to a large-scale, real-world indoor navigation task. Furthermore, learning the spatial layout through a goal directed gaming strategy allowed for the mental manipulation of spatial information as evidenced by enhanced navigation performance when compared to an explicit route learning strategy. We conclude that the immersive and highly interactive nature of the software greatly engages the blind user to actively explore the virtual environment. This in turn generates an accurate sense of a large-scale three-dimensional space and facilitates the learning and transfer of navigation skills to the physical world.
Plow EB, Obretenova SN, Jackson ML, Merabet LB.
Temporal profile of functional visual rehabilitative outcomes modulated by transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuromodulation. 2012;15 (4) :367-73.
AbstractOBJECTIVES: We have previously reported that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) delivered to the occipital cortex enhances visual functional recovery when combined with three months of computer-based rehabilitative training in patients with hemianopia. The principal objective of this study was to evaluate the temporal sequence of effects of tDCS on visual recovery as they appear over the course of training and across different indicators of visual function.
METHODS: Primary objective outcome measures were 1) shifts in visual field border and 2) stimulus detection accuracy within the affected hemifield. These were compared between patients randomized to either vision restoration therapy (VRT) combined with active tDCS or VRT paired with sham tDCS. Training comprised two half-hour sessions, three times a week for three months. Primary outcome measures were collected at baseline (pretest), monthly interim intervals, and at posttest (three months). As secondary outcome measures, contrast sensitivity and reading performance were collected at pretest and posttest time points only.
RESULTS: Active tDCS combined with VRT accelerated the recovery of stimulus detection as between-group differences appeared within the first month of training. In contrast, a shift in the visual field border was only evident at posttest (after three months of training). tDCS did not affect contrast sensitivity or reading performance.
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that tDCS may differentially affect the magnitude and sequence of visual recovery in a manner that is task specific to the type of visual rehabilitative training strategy employed.
Plow EB, Obretenova SN, Jackson ML, Merabet LB.
Temporal Profile of Functional Visual Rehabilitative Outcomes Modulated by Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation. Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society. 2012.
WebsiteAbstractObjectives: We have previously reported that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) delivered to the occipital cortex enhances visual functional recovery when combined with three months of computer-based rehabilitative training in patients with hemianopia. The principal objective of this study was to evaluate the temporal sequence of effects of tDCS on visual recovery as they appear over the course of training and across different indicators of visual function. Methods: Primary objective outcome measures were 1) shifts in visual field border and 2) stimulus detection accuracy within the affected hemifield. These were compared between patients randomized to either vision restoration therapy (VRT) combined with active tDCS or VRT paired with sham tDCS. Training comprised two half-hour sessions, three times a week for three months. Primary outcome measures were collected at baseline (pretest), monthly interim intervals, and at posttest (three months). As secondary outcome measures, contrast sensitivity and reading performance were collected at pretest and posttest time points only. Results: Active tDCS combined with VRT accelerated the recovery of stimulus detection as between-group differences appeared within the first month of training. In contrast, a shift in the visual field border was only evident at posttest (after three months of training). tDCS did not affect contrast sensitivity or reading performance. Conclusions: These results suggest that tDCS may differentially affect the magnitude and sequence of visual recovery in a manner that is task specific to the type of visual rehabilitative training strategy employed.
Plow EB, Obretenova SN, Fregni F, Pascual-Leone A, Merabet LB.
Comparison of Visual Field Training for Hemianopia With Active Versus Sham Transcranial Direct Cortical Stimulation. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 2012.
WebsiteAbstractBACKGROUND: Vision Restoration Therapy (VRT) aims to improve visual field function by systematically training regions of residual vision associated with the activity of suboptimal firing neurons within the occipital cortex. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to modulate cortical excitability. OBJECTIVE: Assess the possible efficacy of tDCS combined with VRT. METHODS: The authors conducted a randomized, double-blind, demonstration-of-concept pilot study where participants were assigned to either VRT and tDCS or VRT and sham. The anode was placed over the occipital pole to target both affected and unaffected lobes. One hour training sessions were carried out 3 times per week for 3 months in a laboratory. Outcome measures included objective and subjective changes in visual field, recording of visual fixation performance, and vision-related activities of daily living (ADLs) and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Although 12 participants were enrolled, only 8 could be analyzed. The VRT and tDCS group demonstrated significantly greater expansion in visual field and improvement on ADLs compared with the VRT and sham group. Contrary to expectations, subjective perception of visual field change was greater in the VRT and sham group. QOL did not change for either group. The observed changes in visual field were unrelated to compensatory eye movements, as shown with fixation monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of occipital cortical tDCS with visual field rehabilitation appears to enhance visual functional outcomes compared with visual rehabilitation alone. TDCS may enhance inherent mechanisms of plasticity associated with training.