Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34867243›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2021

After-Effects of Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation Are Differentially and Phase-Dependently Suppressed by α- and β-Frequency Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation.

Katsuya Ogata, Hisato Nakazono, Takuro Ikeda, Shin-Ichiro Oka, Yoshinobu Goto, Shozo Tobimatsu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Katsuya OgataDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences at Fukuoka, International University of Health and Welfare, Okawa, Japan.
Hisato NakazonoDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medical Science, Fukuoka International University of Health and Welfare, Fukuoka, Japan.
Takuro IkedaDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Health Sciences, Fukuoka International University of Health and Welfare, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shin-Ichiro OkaDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Health Sciences, Fukuoka International University of Health and Welfare, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yoshinobu GotoSchool of Medicine, International University of Health and Welfare, Naritaa, Japan.
Shozo TobimatsuDepartment of Orthoptics, Faculty of Medical Science, Fukuoka International University of Health and Welfare, Fukuoka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is known to produce excitatory after-effects over the primary motor cortex (M1). Recently, transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) at 10 Hz (α) and 20 Hz (β) have been shown to modulate M1 excitability in a phase-dependent manner. Therefore, we hypothesized that tACS would modulate the after-effects of iTBS depending on the stimulation frequency and phase. To test our hypothesis, we examined the effects of α- and β-tACS on iTBS using motor evoked potentials (MEPs). Eighteen and thirteen healthy participants were recruited for α and β tACS conditions, respectively. tACS electrodes were attached over the left M1 and Pz. iTBS over left M1 was performed concurrently with tACS. The first pulse of the triple-pulse burst of iTBS was controlled to match the peak (90°) or trough (270°) phase of the tACS. A sham tACS condition was used as a control in which iTBS was administered without tACS. Thus, each participant was tested in three conditions: the peak and trough of the tACS phases and sham tACS. As a result, MEPs were enhanced after iTBS without tACS (sham condition), as observed in previous studies. α-tACS suppressed iTBS effects at the peak phase but not at the trough phase, while β-tACS suppressed the effects at both phases. Thus, although both types of tACS inhibited the facilitatory effects of iTBS, only α-tACS did so in a phase-dependent manner. Phase-dependent inhibition by α-tACS is analogous to our previous finding in which α-tACS inhibited MEPs online at the peak condition. Conversely, β-tACS reduced the effects of iTBS irrespective of its phase. The coupling of brain oscillations and tACS rhythms is considered important in the generation of spike-timing-dependent plasticity. Additionally, the coupling of θ and γ oscillations is assumed to be important for iTBS induction through long-term potentiation (LTP). Therefore, excessive coupling between β oscillations induced by tACS and γ or θ oscillations induced by iTBS might disturb the coupling of θ and γ oscillations during iTBS. To conclude, the action of iTBS is differentially modulated by neuronal oscillations depending on whether α- or β-tACS is applied.

Indexed as

combined stimulationintermittent theta burst stimulationmotor evoked potentialsphase dependencyprimary motor cortextranscranial alternating current stimulationtranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID34867243
PMCPMC8636087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.