Differential effects of conventional transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) of the cerebellum on offset analgesia

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:bioRxiv (Jan 28, 2025)
Autor principal: O'connor, Niamh
Otros Autores: Ashe, Hannah, Wragan, Max, O'flaherty, Ruairi, Deevy-Gray, Eoin, Witney, Alice G
Publicado:
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Citation/Abstract
Full text outside of ProQuest
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3157049015
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 2692-8205 
024 7 |a 10.1101/2024.10.03.616281  |2 doi 
035 |a 3157049015 
045 0 |b d20250128 
100 1 |a O'connor, Niamh 
245 1 |a Differential effects of conventional transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) of the cerebellum on offset analgesia 
260 |b Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press  |c Jan 28, 2025 
513 |a Working Paper 
520 3 |a Background: Offset analgesia (OA) describes the large decrease in perceived pain in response to a minor decrease in applied painful thermal stimulus. Here non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is used to modulate the cerebellum, since the cerebellum is known to signal sensory prediction errors and implicated in pain processing. Methods: An OA protocol individualized to heat pain threshold (HPT) was applied via TSA-II (Medoc, Israel). NIBS interventions were applied prior to OA. Cathodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and high-definition (4X1) transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) were applied to 46 healthy participants within a sham controlled repeated measures design to examine whether diffuse or focal stimulation differentially modulates OA. Results: OA induced hypoalgesia was robust, with 90% of responses showing a drop in perceived pain (δVAS) > 10 following the 1°C fall in temperature. This OA response was augmented following a protocol with sham and focal cathodal cerebellar stimulation on four OA parameters (OA latency, VAS minimum, VAS mean and VAS 2nd max) relative to pre-stimulation. This effect was differential to the protocol with sham and conventional tDCS where two OA metrics altered (OA duration, VAS 2nd max). Conclusion: OA enhancement via cathodal cerebellar NIBS may involve both a placebo effect and sustaining a noxious sensory prediction error. Understanding how the cerebellum is involved in OA could enhance therapies for pain patients.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Footnotes* There are updates to the introduction, including missing references 
653 |a Signal processing 
653 |a Pain 
653 |a Cerebellum 
653 |a Information processing 
653 |a Latency 
653 |a Electrical stimulation of the brain--ESB 
653 |a Sensory integration 
653 |a Analgesia 
653 |a Placebos 
653 |a Pain perception 
700 1 |a Ashe, Hannah 
700 1 |a Wragan, Max 
700 1 |a O'flaherty, Ruairi 
700 1 |a Deevy-Gray, Eoin 
700 1 |a Witney, Alice G 
773 0 |t bioRxiv  |g (Jan 28, 2025) 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Biological Science Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3157049015/abstract/embedded/L8HZQI7Z43R0LA5T?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full text outside of ProQuest  |u https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.10.03.616281v3