Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Neural Plasticity
Volume 2017, Article ID 1254615, 12 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1254615
Research Article

Cerebellar Cathodal Transcranial Direct Stimulation and Performance on a Verb Generation Task: A Replication Study

1Rijndam Rehabilitation Institute, P.O. Box 23181, 3001 KD Rotterdam, Netherlands
2Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
3Department of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
4Erasmus University College, Rotterdam, Netherlands
5Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
6Department of Biomedical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel

Correspondence should be addressed to K. Spielmann; ln.madnjir@nnamleipsk

Received 22 September 2016; Accepted 12 January 2017; Published 14 February 2017

Academic Editor: Malgorzata Kossut

Copyright © 2017 K. Spielmann et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. M. A. Nitsche and W. Paulus, “Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation,” Journal of Physiology, vol. 527, no. 3, pp. 633–639, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. M. A. Nitsche and W. Paulus, “Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans,” Neurology, vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 1899–1901, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. H. Akhtar, F. Bukhari, M. Nazir, M. N. Anwar, and A. Shahzad, “Therapeutic efficacy of neurostimulation for depression: techniques, current modalities, and future challenges,” Neuroscience Bulletin, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 115–126, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. S. Broeder, E. Nackaerts, E. Heremans et al., “Transcranial direct current stimulation in Parkinson's disease: neurophysiological mechanisms and behavioral effects,” Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, vol. 57, pp. 105–117, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. N. Kang, J. J. Summers, and J. H. Cauraugh, “Transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 345–355, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. A. Monti, R. Ferrucci, M. Fumagalli et al., “Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and language,” Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, vol. 84, no. 8, pp. 832–842, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. J. C. Horvath, J. D. Forte, and O. Carter, “Quantitative review finds no evidence of cognitive effects in healthy populations from single-session transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS),” Brain Stimulation, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 535–550, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. T. D. Vannorsdall, J. J. Van Steenburgh, D. J. Schretlen, R. Jayatillake, R. L. Skolasky, and B. Gordon, “Reproducibility of tDCS results in a randomized trial: failure to replicate findings of tDCS-induced enhancement of verbal fluency,” Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 11–17, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. C. J. Stoodley, “The cerebellum and cognition: evidence from functional imaging studies,” Cerebellum, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 352–365, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. J. D. Schmahmann and J. C. Sherman, “The cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome,” Brain, vol. 121, no. 4, pp. 561–579, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. C. J. Stoodley, E. M. Valera, and J. D. Schmahmann, “Functional topography of the cerebellum for motor and cognitive tasks: an fMRI study,” NeuroImage, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 1560–1570, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. F. M. Krienen and R. L. Buckner, “Segregated fronto-cerebellar circuits revealed by intrinsic functional connectivity,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 2485–2497, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. X. O'Reilly, C. F. Beckmann, V. Tomassini, N. Ramnani, and H. Johansen-Berg, “Distinct and overlapping functional zones in the cerebellum defined by resting state functional connectivity,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 953–965, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. C. J. Stoodley and J. D. Schmahmann, “Functional topography in the human cerebellum: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies,” NeuroImage, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 489–501, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. M. Galea, G. Jayaram, L. Ajagbe, and P. Celnik, “Modulation of cerebellar excitability by polarity-specific noninvasive direct current stimulation,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 29, no. 28, pp. 9115–9122, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. C. Y. Chan, J. Hounsgaard, and C. Nicholson, “Effects of electric fields on transmembrane potential and excitability of turtle cerebellar Purkinje cells in vitro,” The Journal of Physiology, vol. 402, no. 1, pp. 751–771, 1988. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. A. Rahman, P. K. Toshev, and M. Bikson, “Polarizing cerebellar neurons with transcranial Direct Current Stimulation,” Clinical Neurophysiology, vol. 125, no. 3, pp. 435–438, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. S. H. Doeltgen, J. Young, and L. V. Bradnam, “Anodal direct current stimulation of the cerebellum reduces cerebellar brain inhibition but does not influence afferent input from the hand or face in healthy adults,” Cerebellum, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 466–474, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. P. E. Turkeltaub, M. K. Swears, A. M. D'Mello, and C. J. Stoodley, “Cerebellar tDCS as a novel treatment for aphasia? Evidence from behavioral and resting-state functional connectivity data in healthy adults,” Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 491–505, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. P. A. Pope and R. C. Miall, “Task-specific facilitation of cognition by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the cerebellum,” Brain Stimulation, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 84–94, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. P. A. Pope, J. W. Brenton, and R. C. Miall, “Task-specific facilitation of cognition by anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the prefrontal cortex,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 4551–4558, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. H. J. De Smet, P. Paquier, J. Verhoeven, and P. Mariën, “The cerebellum: its role in language and related cognitive and affective functions,” Brain and Language, vol. 127, no. 3, pp. 334–342, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. P. Mariën, H. Ackermann, M. Adamaszek et al., “Consensus paper: language and the cerebellum: an ongoing enigma,” Cerebellum, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 386–410, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. P. Marien, S. Engelborghs, F. Fabbro, and P. P. De Deyn, “The lateralized linguistic cerebellum: a review and a new hypothesis,” Brain and Language, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 580–600, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. S. E. Petersen, P. T. Fox, M. I. Posner, M. Mintun, and M. E. Raichle, “Positron emission tomographic studies of the cortical anatomy of single-word processing,” Nature, vol. 331, no. 6157, pp. 585–589, 1988. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. S. E. Petersen, P. T. Fox, M. I. Posner, M. Mintun, and M. E. Raichle, “Positron emission tomographic studies of the processing of single words,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 153–170, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. M. Frings, A. Dimitrova, C. F. Schorn et al., “Cerebellar involvement in verb generation: an fMRI study,” Neuroscience Letters, vol. 409, no. 1, pp. 19–23, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. P. A. Pope and R. Chris Miall, “Restoring cognitive functions using non-invasive brain stimulation techniques in patients with cerebellar disorders,” Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 5, article 33, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. Fridriksson, J. D. Richardson, J. M. Baker, and C. Rorden, “Transcranial direct current stimulation improves naming reaction time in fluent aphasia: a double-blind, sham-controlled study,” Stroke, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 819–821, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. P. Marangolo, V. Fiori, M. A. Calpagnano et al., “tDCS over the left inferior frontal cortex improves speech production in aphasia,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, vol. 7, article 539, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. M. Meinzer, R. Darkow, R. Lindenberg, and A. Flöel, “Electrical stimulation of the motor cortex enhances treatment outcome in post-stroke aphasia,” Brain, vol. 139, no. 4, pp. 1152–1163, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. S. Wiethoff, M. Hamada, and J. C. Rothwell, “Variability in response to transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex,” Brain Stimulation, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 468–475, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. R. C. Oldfield, “The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory,” Neuropsychologia, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 97–113, 1971. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. E. De Witte, D. Satoer, E. Robert et al., “The dutch linguistic intraoperative protocol: a valid linguistic approach to awake brain surgery,” Brain and Language, vol. 140, pp. 35–48, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. D. H. Brainard, “The psychophysics toolbox,” Spatial Vision, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 433–436, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. D. G. Pelli, “The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies,” Spatial Vision, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 437–442, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. K. Rayner and S. A. Duffy, “Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity,” Memory & Cognition, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 191–201, 1986. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. J. J. S. Barton, H. M. Hanif, L. Eklinder Björnström, and C. Hills, “The word-length effect in reading: a review,” Cognitive Neuropsychology, vol. 31, no. 5-6, pp. 378–412, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. A. Boehringer, K. Macher, J. Dukart, A. Villringer, and B. Pleger, “Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation modulates verbal working memory,” Brain Stimulation, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 649–653, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. R. Ferrucci, S. Marceglia, M. Vergari et al., “Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation impairs the practice-dependent proficiency increase in working memory,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 20, no. 9, pp. 1687–1697, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. B. Savic and B. Meier, “How transcranial direct current stimulation can modulate implicit motor sequence learning and consolidation: a brief review,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, vol. 10, article 26, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. R. Ferrucci, A. R. Brunoni, M. Parazzini et al., “Modulating human procedural learning by cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation,” Cerebellum, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 485–492, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. M. J. Wessel, M. Zimerman, J. E. Timmermann, K. F. Heise, C. Gerloff, and F. C. Hummel, “Enhancing consolidation of a new temporal motor skill by cerebellar noninvasive stimulation,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1660–1667, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. D. J. Herzfeld, D. Pastor, A. M. Haith, Y. Rossetti, R. Shadmehr, and J. O'Shea, “Contributions of the cerebellum and the motor cortex to acquisition and retention of motor memories,” NeuroImage, vol. 98, pp. 147–158, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. J. M. Galea, A. Vazquez, N. Pasricha, J.-J. Orban De Xivry, and P. Celnik, “Dissociating the roles of the cerebellum and motor cortex during adaptive learning: the motor cortex retains what the cerebellum learns,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1761–1770, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. M. A. Smith, A. Ghazizadeh, and R. Shadmehr, “Interacting adaptive processes with different timescales underlie short-term motor learning,” PLoS biology, vol. 4, no. 6, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. J. W. Krakauer and R. Shadmehr, “Consolidation of motor memory,” Trends in Neurosciences, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 58–64, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. E. M. Robertson, A. Pascual-Leone, and R. C. Miall, “Current concepts in procedural consolidation,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 576–582, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. E. Lesage, E. L. Nailer, and R. C. Miall, “Cerebellar BOLD signal during the acquisition of a new lexicon predicts its early consolidation,” Brain and Language, vol. 161, pp. 33–44, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus