- Dept of Clinical and Experimental Sciences
University of Brescia
Viale Europa 11 25123 Brescia, Italy
Cognitive Neuroscience Section
IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli
Via Pilastroni, 4 25125
Brescia, Italy
Carlo Miniussi
University of Trento, Centre for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), Faculty Member
- The core of Carlo Miniussi activity is driven by the goal to understand if cortical plasticity can be induced and man... moreThe core of Carlo Miniussi activity is driven by the goal to understand if cortical plasticity can be induced and manipulated by means of non-invasive brain stimulation in healthy and pathological adult brain. To understand what is the relation between induced synaptic plasticity and cognitive plasticity, and how plasticity can be represented at cognitive level comprising of the activity of a “cognitive functional network”. This is carried on by means of non invasive brain stimulation techniques (i.e., TMS, rTMS, tDCS, tACS and tRNS) combined with other research methods (EEG, fMRI and co-registration TMS-EEG).edit
Cortical excitability modulation and neuroplasticity are considered essential mechanisms for improving clinical and cognitive abilities in neurodegenerative disorders (NDDs). In such context, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)... more
Cortical excitability modulation and neuroplasticity are considered essential mechanisms for improving clinical and cognitive abilities in neurodegenerative disorders (NDDs). In such context, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) shows great promise for facilitating remodeling of neurosynaptic organization. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of how tDCS is currently used as a neurorehabilitation strategy in some NDDs. We describe results from studies in which tDCS was applied in mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer's disease, and primary progressive aphasia. Currently, findings related to the ability of tDCS to restore cognitive dysfunctions and behavioral impairments in these NDDs do not seem to support the notion that tDCS shows clear therapeutic efficacy in patients with mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer disease, and primary progressive aphasia. This is probably because tDCS research in this area is still in its early stages. Methodological concerns, such as differences in tDCS parameters (eg, intensity or duration), target sites, and study design (eg, the relationship between tDCS and the rehabilitation strategy), or the use of underpowered sample sizes may also contribute to these outcomes. Nevertheless, it is important to note that almost no studies have evaluated how the underlying neurophysiological state of patients should guide the application of tDCS. These results should not prevent the use of tDCS in these NDDs, but they should trigger a deeper evaluation of how tDCS should be used. Transcranial direct current stimulation cannot be considered a neurorehabilitation apparatus by itself but should be instead viewed as a method for weakly modulating existing brain excitability. Future studies should aim to improve our understanding of the neurophys-iological mechanisms that underlie the clinical effects of tDCS with the final goal of designing and performing individualized stimulation protocols that can be tailored for each NDD patient and combined with other appropriate neurorehabilitation strategies.
Background: Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (A-tDCS) is a non-invasive technique in which cortical polarization can be used to increase excitability and facilitate learning through the modulation of neuroplasticity.... more
Background: Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (A-tDCS) is a non-invasive technique in which cortical polarization can be used to increase excitability and facilitate learning through the modulation of neuroplasticity. Although the facilitatory effects of A-tDCS are well documented, there is evidence that they are not always present and may even be reversed during task execution. Objective: In this study, we explored the interaction between A-tDCS and task execution. We aimed to test how the excitability induced by the task interacts with the excitability induced by A-tDCS and determines the behavioral outcome. Methods: We performed an experiment in which A-tDCS or a control stimulation (Ctrl) were combined with one of two motor practices (MP), one inducing learning and increasing cortical excitability (F-MP) and the other neither inducing learning nor changing cortical excitability (S-MP). Six blocks of MP were performed while the primary motor cortex was stimulated. Moreover, one block of F-MP was performed before the stimulation (baseline) and one after. In an additional experiment, motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded before the baseline block (TMS-pre) and after the MP (TMS-post). Results: We observed that A-tDCS reduced learning when participants performed the F-MP and facilitated learning for the S-MP. MEPs data paralleled behavioral results, confirming that the effects generated by A-tDCS depend on the excitability changes induced by the task. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that tDCS-induced plasticity is task-dependent, and the concurrent combination of A-tDCS with another excitability-increasing event, e.g., motor practice, may trigger non-additive mechanisms, hindering neuroplasticity.
A review of technical aspects of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) techniques. Recommendations for safe and replicable application of tDCS and other tES methods. Discussion of state-of-the-art methodology and design considerations... more
A review of technical aspects of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) techniques. Recommendations for safe and replicable application of tDCS and other tES methods. Discussion of state-of-the-art methodology and design considerations in tES. a b s t r a c t Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), including transcranial direct and alternating current stimulation (tDCS, tACS) are non-invasive brain stimulation techniques increasingly used for modulation of central nervous system excitability in humans. Here we address methodological issues required for tES application. This review covers technical aspects of tES, as well as applications like exploration of brain physiology , modelling approaches, tES in cognitive neurosciences, and interventional approaches. It aims to help the reader to appropriately design and conduct studies involving these brain stimulation techniques, understand limitations and avoid shortcomings, which might hamper the scientific rigor and potential applications in the clinical domain.
In any given common situation, when an individual controls him/herself or obeys and stops a current action when asked to do, it is because the brain executes an inhibitory process. This ability is essential for adaptive behaviour , and it... more
In any given common situation, when an individual controls him/herself or obeys and stops a current action when asked to do, it is because the brain executes an inhibitory process. This ability is essential for adaptive behaviour , and it is also a requirement for accurate performance in daily life. It has been suggested that there are two main inhibitory functions related to behaviour, as inhibition is observed to affect behaviour at different time intervals. Proactive inhibition permits the subject to control his behavioural response over time by creating a response tendency, while reactive inhibition is considered to be a process that usually inhibits an already initiated response. In this context, it has been established that inhibitory function is implemented by specific fronto-basal-ganglia circuits. In the present study, we investigated the role of the right inferior frontal cortex (rIFC) in response inhibition by combining into a single task the Go-NoGo task and the Stop-Signal task. Concurrently, we applied transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the IFC and recorded electroencephalography (EEG). Thus, we obtained online EEG measurements of the tDCS-induced modifications in the IFC together with the participant's performance in a response inhibition task. We found that applying bilateral tDCS on the IFC (right anodal/left cathodal) significantly increased proactive inhibition, although the behavioural parameters indicative of reactive inhibition were unaffected by the stimulation. Finally, the inhibitory-P3 component reflected a similar modulation under both inhibitory conditions induced by the stimulation. Our data indicates that an online tDCS–ERP approach is achievable, but that a tDCS bilateral montage may not be the most efficient one for modulating the rIFC.
Research Interests:
To evaluate the effects of several single TMS pulses, delivered at two different inter-trial intervals (ITIs), on corticospinal excitability. Twelve healthy volunteers participated in two experimental sessions, during which TMS pulses... more
To evaluate the effects of several single TMS pulses, delivered at two different inter-trial intervals (ITIs), on corticospinal excitability. Twelve healthy volunteers participated in two experimental sessions, during which TMS pulses were delivered at random or at fixed ITIs. The TMS single pulse-induced modulation of corticospinal output (motor evoked potential amplitude - MEP) was evaluated on-line. Each session began with a baseline block, followed by 10 blocks, with 20 TMS pulses each. Intra- and inter-block effects were valuated using an ANOVA model, through nested random effect on subjects considering the subject-specific variability. The delivery of successive TMS pulses significantly changed both intra-block and inter-block cortical excitability, as demonstrated by an increase in the amplitude of MEPs (p<0.001) and supported through trend analyses, showing a perfect linear trend for inter-block levels (R(2)=1) and nearly linear trend for intra-block levels (R(2)=0.97). T...