ArticlePloS one2018
Modulation of motor excitability by cortical optogenetic theta burst stimulation.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06775145 (Therapeutic Effect of Neuromodulation on Anxiety Disorders by High-Definition Transcranial Electrical Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Therapeutic Effect of Neuromodulation on Anxiety Disorders by High-Definition Transcranial Electrical Stimulation
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pilot study of using transcranial temporal interfering theta-burst stimulation for modulating motor excitability in rat.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Non-Faradaic optoelectrodes for safe electrical neuromodulation.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Assessing the mechanisms of brain plasticity by transcranial magnetic stimulation.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2023Review
- Consolidation of motor sequence learning eliminates susceptibility of SMAproper to TMS: a combined rTMS and cTBS study.Experimental brain research · 2022Article
- Spinal cord representation of motor cortex plasticity reflects corticospinal tract LTP.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Neurostimulation for Stroke Rehabilitation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- Effect of the combination of high-frequency repetitive magnetic stimulation and neurotropin on injured sciatic nerve regeneration in rats.Neural regeneration research · 2020Article
- Neuromodulatory Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Motor Excitability in Rats.Neural plasticity · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) and continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) are protocols used in repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) or cortical electrical stimulation (CES) to facilitate or suppress corticospinal excitability. However, rTMS and CES excite all types of neuron in the target cortex probed by the coil or electrode, making it difficult to differentiate the effect of TBS on specific neural circuits involved in motor plasticity. In this study, TBS protocols were converted into an optogenetic model to achieve focalized and cell-type-specific cortical modulation. Light-sensitive channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2) was expressed in the glutamatergic neuron in the primary motor cortex (M1) driven by the CaMKIIα promoter. A custom-made optrode comprising an optical fiber and a metal cannula electrode was fabricated to achieve optogenetic stimulation and simultaneous local field potential (LFP) recording. Single-pulse CES was delivered into M1 to elicit motor-evoked potential (MEP), which served as an indicator of motor excitability, before and after TBS intervention. Results show that both CES-iTBS and optogenetic iTBS (Opto-iTBS) can potentiate MEP activity. However, CES-cTBS suppressed MEP activity whereas Opto-cTBS enhanced it. This discrepancy may have resulted from the different neural networks targeted by the two TBS modalities, with CES-cTBS exciting all types of neuron and Opto-cTBS targeting excitatory neuron specifically. The results support the idea that intra-cortical networks determine the variation of TBS-induced neuroplasticity. This study shows that focalized and cell-type-specific brain stimulation using the optogenetic approach is viable and can be extended for further exploration of neuroplasticity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.