4.7 Article

Transcranial direct current stimulation in mild cognitive impairment: Behavioral effects and neural mechanisms

期刊

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 1032-1040

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.07.159

关键词

Transcranial direct current stimulation; Mild cognitive impairment; Functional magnetic resonance imaging; Resting-state fMRI; Language; Aging

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [ARC FT120100608]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [379-8/1, 379-10/1, 379-11/1, DFG-Exc-257, 423/1-1]
  3. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung [FKZ0315673A, 01GY1144, 01EO0801]
  4. Else Kroner-Fresenius-Stiftung [2011-119]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The long preclinical phase of Alzheimer's disease provides opportunities for potential disease-modifying interventions in prodromal stages such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (anodal-tDCS), with its potential to enhance neuroplasticity, may allow improving cognition in MCI. Methods: In a double-blind, cross-over, sham-controlled study, anodal-tDCS was administered to the left inferior frontal cortex during task-related and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to assess its impact on cognition and brain functions in MCI. Results: During sham stimulation, MCI patients produced fewer correct semantic-word-retrieval responses than matched healthy controls, which was associated with hyperactivity in bilateral prefrontal regions. Anodal-tDCS significantly improved performance to the level of controls, reduced task-related prefrontal hyperactivity and resulted in normalization of abnormal network configuration during resting-state fMRI. Discussion: Anodal-tDCS exerts beneficial effects on cognition and brain functions in MCI, thereby providing a framework to test whether repeated stimulation sessions may yield sustained reversal of cognitive deficits. (C) 2015 The Alzheimer's Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据