Neuropsychologia · 2019
Spino-cerebellar tDCS modulates N100 components of the P300 event related potential.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ruggiero Fabiana, Ferrucci Roberta, Bocci Tommaso, Nigro Martina, Vergari Maurizio, Marceglia Sara, Barbieri Sergio, Priori Alberto
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of the cerebellum and spinal cord in cognitive processes, we assessed changes in event-related potentials (ERPs), before and after different combinations of spinal and cerebellar direct current stimulation (tDCS) in healthy subjects.
METHOD: We enrolled 37 volunteers (11 males and 26 females, aged 20-50 years), who were subsequently randomly assigned to one of four stimulation conditions: i) anodal cerebellar tDCS, with the reference electrode over the right shoulder; ii) anodal spinal tDCS, with the reference electrode over the right shoulder; iii) anodal spinal tDCS with cathodal cerebellar tDCS, and iv) sham stimulation. Stimulation intensity was set at 2 mA and delivered for 20 min. ERPs were assessed in an auditory oddball task before (T0) and 5 (T1) and 30 min (T2) after tDCS offset.
RESULTS: In condition iii, spino-cerebellar tDCS, the N100 component at T2 increased in amplitude by 60% (p = 0.019), whereas the sham stimulation left the N100 amplitude unchanged (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The N100 wave reflects pre-attentive processes and correlates with arousal due to a specific stimuli and selective attention. Because spino-cerebellar tDCS induces electric fields in the brainstem, the facilitation of the N100 may be due to the modulation of the reticular formation. Regardless of the underlying mechanism, spino-cerebellar tDCS can help patients with deficits at the pre-attentive or selective attentional level.
METHOD: We enrolled 37 volunteers (11 males and 26 females, aged 20-50 years), who were subsequently randomly assigned to one of four stimulation conditions: i) anodal cerebellar tDCS, with the reference electrode over the right shoulder; ii) anodal spinal tDCS, with the reference electrode over the right shoulder; iii) anodal spinal tDCS with cathodal cerebellar tDCS, and iv) sham stimulation. Stimulation intensity was set at 2 mA and delivered for 20 min. ERPs were assessed in an auditory oddball task before (T0) and 5 (T1) and 30 min (T2) after tDCS offset.
RESULTS: In condition iii, spino-cerebellar tDCS, the N100 component at T2 increased in amplitude by 60% (p = 0.019), whereas the sham stimulation left the N100 amplitude unchanged (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The N100 wave reflects pre-attentive processes and correlates with arousal due to a specific stimuli and selective attention. Because spino-cerebellar tDCS induces electric fields in the brainstem, the facilitation of the N100 may be due to the modulation of the reticular formation. Regardless of the underlying mechanism, spino-cerebellar tDCS can help patients with deficits at the pre-attentive or selective attentional level.