Cited by 34Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurological disorders and treatments

Age-dependent non-linear neuroplastic effects of cathodal tDCS in the elderly population: a titration study

Open access
Ghasemian-Shirvan, Ensiyeh, Mosayebi-Samani, Mohsen, Farnad, Leila, Kuo, Min-Fang, Meesen, Raf L.J., Nitsche, Michael A.·2022·Brain Stimulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Neuromodulatory effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in older humans have shown heterogeneous results, possibly due to sub-optimal stimulation protocols associated with limited knowledge about optimized stimulation parameters in this age group. We systematically explored the association between the stimulation dosage of cathodal tDCS and induced after-effects on motor cortex excitability in the elderly. METHOD: Thirty-nine healthy volunteers in two age groups, namely Pre-Elderly (50-65 years) and Elderly (66-80 years), participated in the study. Ten sessions of cathodal tDCS, with a combination of four intensities (1, 2, 3 mA and sham) and three durations (15, 20, 30 min) were conducted over the M1 in each participant. Cortical excitability changes were monitored with TMS-induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs) for up to 2 h after stimulation. RESULTS: Motor cortex excitability was reduced by cathodal stimulation intensities of 1 and 3 mA in both age groups, in accordance with results observed in the younger age groups of previous studies. For the 2 mA stimulation condition, an age-dependent conversion of plasticity into a stimulation duration-dependent excitability enhancement was observed in the Pre-Elderly group, whereas in the Elderly group, LTD-like plasticity was preserved, or abolished, depending on stimulation duration. CONCLUSION: The LTD-like plasticity effects induced by cathodal tDCS originally described in young adults are also observable in older humans, but non-linearities of the resulting plasticity were partially preserved only in the Pre-Elderly, but not the Elderly group. These results aid in understanding age-dependent plasticity dynamics in humans, and to define more efficient tDCS protocols in the aging brain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brs.2022.01.011

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Transcranial direct current stimulationeupdate 2011. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2011;29(6):463e92.
  2. Hoeltke V, Jakob E. Lüdenscheider aktivitatsfragebogen zum risikofaktor bewegungsmangel. Zugriff am 2002;24:2011.
  3. Yang S-N, Tang Y-G, Zucker RS. Selective induction of LTP and LTD by post- synaptic [Ca2þ]i elevation. J Neurophysiol 1999;81(2):781e7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ghasemian-Shirvan, E., Mosayebi-Samani, M., Farnad, L., Kuo, M.-F., Meesen, R. L. J., & Nitsche, M. A.
Affiliations
  • Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors (DE)
  • Hasselt University (BE)
  • BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil Bochum (DE)
Corresponding author
Nitsche, Michael A.
Venue
Brain Stimulation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-03
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
296-305
ISSN
  • 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-861X
OpenAlex
W4206968992
Cited by
34
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8
FWCI
2.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain stimulation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Document Server@UHasselt (UHasselt) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01EE1501, 01GQ1424E)
  • Universiteit Hasselt (BOF17BL03)
  • Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGent
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation, neuroplasticity, aging, older adults, motor cortex excitability, long-term potentiation, long-term depression, stimulation intensity, stimulation duration, age-dependent plasticity, motor evoked potentials
MeSH terms
Cortical Excitability, Aged, Humans, Middle Aged, Motor Cortex, Neuronal Plasticity, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review