Prefrontal but not cerebellar tDCS attenuates renewal of extinguished conditioned eyeblink responses.

An extended neural network is known to underlie extinction learning. As yet, comparatively little is known about the possible contribution of the cerebellum and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). In the present study, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was used to provide further evidence that the dlPFC and the cerebellum are involved in extinction-related processes. A total of 100 young and healthy human participants were randomly assigned to one of five stimulation groups: (1) anodal tDCS of the cerebellum, (2) cathodal tDCS of the cerebellum, (3) anodal tDCS of the dlPFC, (4) cathodal tDCS of the dlPFC, and (5) sham stimulation. Participants underwent delay eyeblink conditioning using an A-B-A/B renewal paradigm. Two different colors of background light (orange and blue) were used as contexts. On day 1, acquisition of conditioned eyeblink responses was performed in context A, followed by extinction in context B. tDCS was applied during extinction. On day 2, extinction recall was tested in contexts A and B with higher incidence of conditioned responses in acquisition context A compared to extinction context B indicating renewal effects. All groups showed significant effects of acquisition of conditioned eyeblink responses and significant effects of extinction. There was no significant difference in extinction between stimulation groups. During extinction recall, renewal effects were present in all groups, except the group which had received anodal tDCS of the dlPFC during extinction. In the present study, no direct effects of dlPFC or cerebellar tDCS were demonstrated on extinction. Anodal tDCS of the dlPFC, but not the cerebellum, resulted in delayed effects on context-related processes of extinction, possibly explained by shifting attention away from the context and towards the conditioned stimulus during extinction learning. Anodal tDCS of the dlPFC attenuated context-related recall of learned aversive responses. Effects of tDCS, however, were weak and need to be confirmed in future studies. Lack of cerebellar tDCS effects do not exclude a possible role of the cerebellum in extinction-related processes, and are likely explained by methodological limitations of cerebellar tDCS.

Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the human motor cortex at an intensity of 1 mA with an electrode size of 35 cm(2) has been shown to induce shifts of cortical excitability during and after stimulation. These shifts are polarity-specific with cathodal tDCS resulting in a decrease and anodal stimulation in an increase of cortical excitability. In clinical and cognitive studies, stronger stimulation intensities are used frequently, but their physiological effects on cortical excitability have not yet been explored. Therefore, here we aimed to explore the effects of 2 mA tDCS on cortical excitability. We applied 2 mA anodal or cathodal tDCS for 20 min on the left primary motor cortex of 14 healthy subjects. Cathodal tDCS at 1 mA and sham tDCS for 20 min was administered as control session in nine and eight healthy subjects, respectively. Motor cortical excitability was monitored by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-elicited motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) from the right first dorsal interosseous muscle. Global corticospinal excitability was explored via single TMS pulse-elicited MEP amplitudes, and motor thresholds. Intracortical effects of stimulation were obtained by cortical silent period (CSP), short latency intracortical inhibition (SICI) and facilitation (ICF), and I wave facilitation. The above-mentioned protocols were recorded both before and immediately after tDCS in randomized order. Additionally, single-pulse MEPs, motor thresholds, SICI and ICF were recorded every 30 min up to 2 h after stimulation end, evening of the same day, next morning, next noon and next evening. Anodal as well as cathodal tDCS at 2 mA resulted in a significant increase of MEP amplitudes, whereas 1 mA cathodal tDCS decreased corticospinal excitability. A significant shift of SICI and ICF towards excitability enhancement after both 2 mA cathodal and anodal tDCS was observed. At 1 mA, cathodal tDCS reduced single-pulse TMS-elicited MEP amplitudes and shifted SICI and ICF towards inhibition. No significant changes were observed in the other protocols. Sham tDCS did not induce significant MEP alterations. These results suggest that an enhancement of tDCS intensity does not necessarily increase efficacy of stimulation, but might also shift the direction of excitability alterations. This should be taken into account for applications of the stimulation technique using different intensities and durations in order to achieve stronger or longer lasting after-effects.

Lack of cerebellar tDCS effects on learning of a complex whole body dynamic balance task in middle-aged (50-65 years) adults.

BACKGROUND: Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is widely considered as a promising non-invasive tool to foster motor performance and learning in health and disease. The results of previous studies, however, are inconsistent. Our group failed to provide evidence for an effect of cerebellar tDCS on learning of a complex whole body dynamic balance task in young and healthy participants. Ceiling effects in the young study population are one possible explanation for the negative findings. METHODS: In the present study, we therefore tested 40 middle-aged healthy participants between the ages of 50 to 65 years. Participants received either anodal or sham cerebellar tDCS using a double-blinded study design while performing a balance task on a Lafayette Instrument 16,030 stability platform®. Mean platform angle and mean balance time were assessed as outcome measures. RESULTS: Significant learning effects were found in all participants. Balancing performance and learning rate was significantly less in the group of middle-aged adults compared to our previous group of young adults. No significant effects of cerebellar tDCS were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are in line with other studies that have failed to prove robust effects of cerebellar tDCS on motor learning. The present findings, however, do not exclude cerebellar tDCS effects. tDCS effects may be more prominent after repeated stimulation, using other stimulus parameters, in patient populations, or in other motor learning tasks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Diverging effects of nicotine on motor learning performance: Improvement in deprived smokers and attenuation in non-smokers.

Nicotine modulates cognition and neuroplasticity in smokers and non-smokers. A possible mechanism for its effect on learning and memory performance is its impact on long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD). As neuroplasticity is closely connected to learning processes, we aimed to explore the effect of nicotine in healthy, young smokers and non-smokers on performance of the serial reaction time task (SRTT), a sequential motor learning paradigm. 20 nicotine-deprived smokers and 20 non-smokers participated in the study and were exposed to nicotine or placebo medication. Deprived smokers under placebo medication displayed reduced performance in terms of reaction time and error rates compared to the non-smoking group. After application of nicotine, performance in smokers improved while it deteriorated in non-smokers. These results indicate a restituting effect of nicotine in smokers in terms of cognitive parameters. This sheds further light on the proposed mechanism of nicotine on learning processes, which might be linked to the addictive component of nicotine, the probability of relapse and thus needs also be addressed in cessation treatment.

Compromised neuroplasticity in cigarette smokers under nicotine withdrawal is restituted by the nicotinic α4ß2-receptor partial agonist varenicline.

Nicotine modulates neuroplasticity and improves cognitive functions in animals and humans. In the brain of smoking individuals, calcium-dependent plasticity induced by non-invasive brain stimulation methods such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and paired associative stimulation (PAS) is impaired by nicotine withdrawal, but partially re-established after nicotine re-administration. In order to investigate the underlying mechanism further, we tested the impact of the α4ß2-nicotinic receptor partial agonist varenicline on focal and non-focal plasticity in smokers during nicotine withdrawal, induced by PAS and tDCS, respectively. We administered low (0.3 mg) and high (1.0 mg) single doses of varenicline or placebo medication before stimulation over the left motor cortex of 20 healthy smokers under nicotine withdrawal. Motor cortex excitability was monitored by single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation-induced motor evoked potential amplitudes for 36 hours after plasticity induction. Stimulation-induced plasticity was absent under placebo medication, whereas it was present in all conditions under high dose. Low dose restituted only tDCS-induced non-focal plasticity, producing no significant impact on focal plasticity. High dose varenicline also prolonged inhibitory plasticity. These results are comparable to the impact of nicotine on withdrawal-related impaired plasticity in smokers and suggest that α4ß2 nicotinic receptors are relevantly involved in plasticity deficits and restitution in smokers.