A Literature Review on Optimal Stimulation Parameters of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Motor Recovery After Stroke
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique with potential in stroke rehabilitation by modulating cortical excitability. However, the optimal parameters, including electrode placement, current intensity, stimulation duration, and electrode size, remain poorly understood, and the interactions among these factors contribute to mixed results in motor recovery post-stroke. This review explores the various stimulation parameters and their impact on enhancing corticospinal excitability (CSE) and motor function recovery. Different electrode placement (montages), such as anodal, cathodal, and bi-hemispheric stimulation, have demonstrated varying effectiveness in restoring motor function. Bihemispheric stimulation demonstrated a larger effect size compared to other unihemispheric (anodal or cathodal) stimulation; however, its relative superiority remains inconclusive. Inter-individual anatomical variations, such as skull thickness, lesion location, and cortical atrophy, can affect tDCS outcomes, highlighting the need for personalized electrode placement guided by computational modeling based on brain imaging. Furthermore, stimulation intensity, typically 1–2 mA, exhibited nonlinear effects on CSE, contrasting with the dose-response relationships observed in earlier studies. Stimulation duration is also critical, with evidence suggesting that prolonged stimulation may reverse excitability-enhancing effects beyond a certain threshold. While smaller electrodes enhance focality, an appropriately sized electrode is necessary to effectively modulate electrical activity in the target region, with evidence suggesting a dose-response relationship between electrode size and motor recovery. Overall, the interplay among these parameters underscores the need for personalized and optimized tDCS protocols to achieve consistent motor recovery in stroke patients. Future research should focus on refining these parameters to maximize the therapeutic benefits of tDCS.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique with potential in stroke rehabilitation by modulating cortical excitability. However, the optimal parameters, including electrode placement, current intensity, stimulation duration, and electrode size, remain poorly understood, and the interactions among these factors contribute to mixed results in motor recovery post-stroke. This review explores the various stimulation parameters and their impact on enhancing corticospinal excitability (CSE) and motor function recovery. Different electrode placement (montages), such as anodal, cathodal, and bi-hemispheric stimulation, have demonstrated varying effectiveness in restoring motor function. Bihemispheric stimulation demonstrated a larger effect size compared to other unihemispheric (anodal or cathodal) stimulation; however, its relative superiority remains inconclusive. Inter-individual anatomical variations, such as skull thickness, lesion location, and cortical atrophy, can affect tDCS outcomes, highlighting the need for personalized electrode placement guided by computational modeling based on brain imaging. Furthermore, stimulation intensity, typically 1–2 mA, exhibited nonlinear effects on CSE, contrasting with the dose-response relationships observed in earlier studies. Stimulation duration is also critical, with evidence suggesting that prolonged stimulation may reverse excitability-enhancing effects beyond a certain threshold. While smaller electrodes enhance focality, an appropriately sized electrode is necessary to effectively modulate electrical activity in the target region, with evidence suggesting a dose-response relationship between electrode size and motor recovery. Overall, the interplay among these parameters underscores the need for personalized and optimized tDCS protocols to achieve consistent motor recovery in stroke patients. Future research should focus on refining these parameters to maximize the therapeutic benefits of tDCS.
참고문헌 (24)
- Murase N, "Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke", Ann Neurol, 55, pp.400~409 (2004)
- Di Pino G, "Modulation of brain plasticity in stroke : a novel model for neurorehabilitation", Nat Rev Neurol, 10, pp.597~608 (2014)
- Elsner B, "Transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS)for improving activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning, in people after stroke", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 11, pp.CD009645~ (2020)
- Van Hoornweder S, "The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on upper-limb function post-stroke : a meta-analysis of multiple-session studies", Clin Neurophysiol, 132, pp.1897~1918 (2021)
- Chhatbar PY, "Transcranial direct current stimulation post-stroke upper extremity motor recovery studies exhibit a dose–response relationship", Brain Stimulat, 9, pp.16~26 (2016)
- Youssef H, "Comparison of bihemispheric and unihemispheric M1 transcranial direct current stimulations during physical therapy in subacute stroke patients : a randomized controlled trial", Neurophysiol Clin, 53, pp.102895~ (2023)
- Yoon MJ, "Electric field simulation and appropriate electrode positioning for optimized transcranial direct current stimulation of stroke patients : an in silico model", Sci Rep, 14, pp.2850~ (2024)
- Chhatbar PY, "Safety and tolerability of transcranial direct current stimulation to stroke patients-a phase I current escalation study", Brain Stimulat, 10, pp.553~559 (2017)
- Nitsche MA, "Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation", J Physiol, 527, pp.633~639 (2000)
- Jamil A, "Current intensity-and polarity-specific online and aftereffects of transcranial direct current stimulation : an fMRI study", Hum Brain Mapp, 41, pp.1644~1666 (2020)
- Bastani A, "Differential modulation of corticospinal excitability by different current densities of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation", PLoS One, 8, pp.e72254~ (2013)
- Kidgell DJ, "Different current intensities of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation do not differentially modulate motor cortex plasticity", Neural Plast, 2013, pp.603502~ (2013)
- Batsikadze G, "Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans", J Physiol, 591, pp.1987~2000 (2013)
- Stagg CJ, "Physiology of transcranial direct current stimulation", J ECT, 34, pp.144~152 (2018)
- Nitsche MA, "Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans", Neurology, 57, pp.1899~1901 (2001)
- Vignaud P, "Duration but not intensity influences transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS)after-effects on cortical excitability", Neurophysiol Clin, 48, pp.89~92 (2018)
- Hassanzahraee M, "Determination of anodal tDCS duration threshold for reversal of corticospinal excitability : an investigation for induction of counter-regulatory mechanisms", Brain Stimulat, 13, pp.832~839 (2020)
- Hassanzahraee M, "Determination of anodal tDCS intensity threshold for reversal of corticospinal excitability : an investigation for induction of counter-regulatory mechanisms", Sci Rep, 10, pp.16108~ (2020)
- Bienenstock EL, "Theory for the development of neuron selectivity : orientation specificity and binocular interaction in visual cortex", J Neurosci, 2, pp.32~48 (1982)
- Karabanov A, "Consensus paper : probing homeostatic plasticity of human cortex with non-invasive transcranial brain stimulation", Brain Stimulat, 8, pp.993~1006 (2015)
- Nitsche MA, "Shaping the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of the human motor cortex", J Neurophysiol, 97, pp.3109~3117 (2007)
- Ho KA, "The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS)electrode size and current intensity on motor cortical excitability : evidence from single and repeated sessions", Brain Stimulat, 9, pp.1~7 (2016)
- Nudo RJ, "Reorganization of movement representations in primary motor cortex following focal ischemic infarcts in adult squirrel monkeys", J Neurophysiol, 75, pp.2144~2149 (1996)
- Grefkes C, "Connectivity-based approaches in stroke and recovery of function", Lancet Neurol, 13, pp.206~216 (2014)