Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Targeting the Entire Motor Network Does Not Increase Corticospinal Excitability

Journal Article (2022)
Author(s)

Joris Van der Cruijsen (Erasmus MC, TU Delft - Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control)

Zeb D. Jonker (Rijndam Rehabilitation Centre, Erasmus MC)

Eleni Rosalina Andrinopoulou (Erasmus MC)

Jessica E. Wijngaarden (Student TU Delft, Erasmus MC)

Ditte A. Tangkau (Erasmus MC)

Joke H.M. Tulen (Erasmus MC)

Maarten A. Frens (Erasmus MC)

Gerard M. Ribbers (Rijndam Rehabilitation Centre, Erasmus MC)

Ruud W. Selles (Erasmus MC)

Research Group
Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.842954
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2022
Language
English
Research Group
Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control
Volume number
16
Article number
842954
Downloads counter
378
Collections
Institutional Repository
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the contralateral primary motor cortex of the target muscle (conventional tDCS) has been described to enhance corticospinal excitability, as measured with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Recently, tDCS targeting the brain regions functionally connected to the contralateral primary motor cortex (motor network tDCS) was reported to enhance corticospinal excitability more than conventional tDCS. We compared the effects of motor network tDCS, 2 mA conventional tDCS, and sham tDCS on corticospinal excitability in 21 healthy participants in a randomized, single-blind within-subject study design. We applied tDCS for 12 min and measured corticospinal excitability with TMS before tDCS and at 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 min after tDCS. Statistical analysis showed that neither motor network tDCS nor conventional tDCS significantly increased corticospinal excitability relative to sham stimulation. Furthermore, the results did not provide evidence for superiority of motor network tDCS over conventional tDCS. Motor network tDCS seems equally susceptible to the sources of intersubject and intrasubject variability previously observed in response to conventional tDCS.