Preconditioning cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates the neuroplastic effect of subsequent anodal transcranial direct current stimulation applied during cycling in young adults

被引:6
|
作者
Pourmajidian, Maryam [1 ]
Lauber, Benedikt [2 ]
Sidhu, Simranjit K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Adelaide, Adelaide Med Sch, Discipline Physiol, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[2] Univ Fribourg, Dept Neurosci & Movement Sci, Fribourg, Switzerland
关键词
Corticospinal excitability; Neuromodulation; Cycling exercise; Homeostatic metaplasticity; PAIRED ASSOCIATIVE STIMULATION; MOTOR CORTEX PLASTICITY; AEROBIC EXERCISE; MAGNETIC STIMULATION; SINGLE BOUT; INDUCTION; TDCS; METAPLASTICITY; EXCITABILITY; INDIVIDUALS;
D O I
10.1016/j.neulet.2019.134597
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
The study aimed to examine the effect of a pre-conditioning cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) before subsequent anodal-tDCS (atDCS) was applied during low workload cycling exercise on the corticospinal responses in young healthy individuals. Eleven young subjects participated in two sessions receiving either conditioning ctDCS or sham stimulation, followed by atDCS while cycling (i.e. ctDCS-atDCS, sham-atDCS) at 1.2 times their body weight (84 +/- 20 W) in a counterbalanced double-blind design. Corticospinal excitability was measured with motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited via transcranial magnetic stimulation with the intensity set to produce an MEP amplitude of 1 mV in a resting hand muscle at baseline (PRE), following preconditioning tDCS (POST - COND) and post atDCS combined with cycling exercise (POST-TEST). There was a significant interaction between time and intervention (P < 0.01) on MEPs. MEPs increased from PRE (1.0 +/- 0.06 mV) to POST-TEST (1.3 +/- 0.06 mV) during ctDCS-atDCS (P < 0.001) but did not change significantly across time during sham-atDCS (P > 0.7). Furthermore, MEPs were higher in ctDCS-atDCS compared to sham-atDCS (both P < 0.01) at POST - COND (ctDCS-atDCS: 1.1 +/- 0.06 mV, sham-atDCS: 1.0 +/- 0.06 mV) and POST-TEST (ctDCS-atDCS: 1.3 +/- 0.06 mV, sham-atDCS: 1.0 +/- 0.06 mV). These outcomes demonstrate that pre-conditioning cathodal tDCS can enhance subsequent corticospinal excitability changes induced by anodal tDCS applied in combination with cycling exercise. The findings have implications for the application of tDCS in combination with cycling exercise in rehabilitation and sporting contexts.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Neuroprotective effect of cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation
    Pace, M.
    Baracchi, F.
    Uncini, A.
    Bassetti, C. L.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2013, 260 : S182 - S182
  • [2] Does Cathodal Preconditioning Enhance the Effects of Subsequent Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Corticospinal Excitability and Grip Strength?
    Lewis, Aidan
    Rattray, Ben
    Flood, Andrew
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2025, 39 (01) : e1 - e12
  • [3] BOTH ANODAL AND CATHODAL TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT STIMULATION IMPROVES SEMANTIC PROCESSING
    Brueckner, Sabrina
    Kammer, Thomas
    NEUROSCIENCE, 2017, 343 : 269 - 275
  • [4] Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Anodal or cathodal stimulation for chronic stroke - which is better?
    Marquez, J. L.
    Parsons, M.
    Stoginovsky, E.
    Conley, A.
    Lagopolous, J.
    Karyinidis, F.
    CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES, 2014, 37 : 300 - 300
  • [5] Effect of Anodal and Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on DLPFC on Modulation of Inhibitory Control in ADHD
    Soltaninejad, Zahra
    Nejati, Vahid
    Ekhtiari, Hamed
    JOURNAL OF ATTENTION DISORDERS, 2019, 23 (04) : 325 - 332
  • [6] Response to comment on "Effect of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation"
    Stonsaovapak, Chernkhuan
    Hemrungroj, Solaphat
    Terachinda, Pim
    Piravej, Krisna
    ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2022, 103 (02): : 373 - 374
  • [7] Efficacy of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation is Related to Sensitivity to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
    Labruna, Ludovica
    Jamil, Asif
    Fresnoza, Shane
    Batsikadze, Giorgi
    Kuo, Min-Fang
    Vanderschelden, Benjamin
    Ivry, Richard B.
    Nitsche, Michael A.
    BRAIN STIMULATION, 2016, 9 (01) : 8 - 15
  • [8] Comparison of Neuroplastic Responses to Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation in Subacute Stroke
    Nicolo, Pierre
    Magnin, Cecile
    Pedrazzini, Elena
    Plomp, Gijs
    Mottaz, Anais
    Schnider, Armin
    Guggisberg, Adrian G.
    ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2018, 99 (05): : 862 - 872
  • [9] Transcranial direct current stimulation in chronic migraine: a pilot trial combining cathodal visual and anodal dlpfc stimulation
    Baschi, R.
    Sava, S. L.
    La Salvia, V.
    De Pasqua, V.
    Schoenen, J.
    Magis, D.
    JOURNAL OF HEADACHE AND PAIN, 2014, 15
  • [10] Safety limits of cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation in rats
    Liebetanz, David
    Koch, Reinhard
    Mayenfels, Susanne
    Koenig, Fatima
    Paulus, Walter
    Nitsche, Michael A.
    CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2009, 120 (06) : 1161 - 1167