brain plasticity effects of neuromodulation against multiple sclerosis fatigue
Clicks: 270
ID: 237725
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
270 views
42 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #128 of 263 articles by views in journal of photochemistry and photobiology a: chemistry
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 263 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
RationaleWe recently reported on the efficacy of a personalized transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) treatment in reducing MS fatigue. That result supports the notion that interventions targeted at modifying unbalanced interactions within the sensorimotor network could represent valid non-pharmacological treatments. ObjectiveThe present work aimed at assessing whether the mentioned intervention also induces changes in the excitability of cortical areas. MethodTwo separate groups of fatigued MS patients were given a 5-day tDCS treatments targeting respectively the whole body somatosensory areas (S1wb) and the hand sensorimotor areas (SM1hand). The study had a double blind, sham-controlled, randomized, cross-over (Real vs. Sham) design. Before and after each treatment, we measured fatigue levels (by the modified Fatigue Impact Scale, mFIS), motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in response to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) in response to median nerve stimulation. We took MEPs and SEPs as measures of the excitability of the primary motor area (M1) and the primary somatosensory area (S1) respectively.ResultsThe Real S1wb treatment produced a 27% reduction of the mFIS baseline level, while the SM1hand treatment showed no difference between Real and Sham stimulations. M1 excitability increased on average 6 % of the baseline in the S1wb group and 40% in the SM1hand group. Observed SEP changes were not significant and we found no association between M1 excitability changes and mFIS decrease.ConclusionsThe tDCS treatment was more effective against MS fatigue when the electrode was focused on the bilateral whole body somatosensory area. Changes in S1 and M1 excitability did not correlate with symptoms amelioration.SignificanceThe neuromodulation treatment that proved effective against MS fatigue induced only minor variations of the motor cortex excitability, not enough to explain the beneficial effects of
| Reference Key |
etecchio2015frontiersbrain
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Franca eTecchio;Franca eTecchio;Andrea eCancelli;Andrea eCancelli;Carlo eCottone;Roberta eFerrucci;Maurizio eVergari;Giancarlo eZito;Giancarlo eZito;Patrizio ePasqualetti;Patrizio ePasqualetti;Maria Maddalena eFilippi;A eGhazaryan;A eGhazaryan;D eLupoi;Fenne M Smits;Alessandro eGiordani;Alessandro eGiordani;Simone eMigliore;Camillo ePorcaro;Camillo ePorcaro;Carlo eSalustri;paolo m Rossini;paolo m Rossini;Alberto ePriori |
| Journal | journal of photochemistry and photobiology a: chemistry |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fneur.2015.00141
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.