Acute effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on photoparoxysmal response.


Yılmaz Erol T., İlgezdi Kaya İ., Ur Özçelik E., Aksu S., Şirin N. G., Bebek N., ...Daha Fazla

Epilepsy research, cilt.201, ss.107320, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 201
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2024.107320
  • Dergi Adı: Epilepsy research
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, PASCAL, Abstracts in Social Gerontology, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.107320
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, Photoparoxysmal response, Photosensitivity
  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Introduction: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive technique, used to modify the excitability of the central nervous system. The main mechanism of tDCS is to change the excitability by subthreshold modulation by affecting neuronal membrane potentials in the direction of depolarization or repolarization. tDCS was previously investigated as an alternative adjunctive therapy in patients with epilepsy. We aimed here to investigate the acute effect of tDCS on the photoparoxysmal response (PPR) in EEG. Methods: We enrolled 11 consecutive patients diagnosed with idiopathic generalized epilepsy who had PPR on at least 2 EEGs. Three different procedures, including sham, anodal, and cathodal tDCS were applied to the patients at intervals of one week by placing the active electrode over Oz, for 2 mA, 20 minutes. Spike-wave indices (SWI) were counted by two researchers independently and were compared during intermittent photic stimulation (IPS) on EEGs both before and after the application. Results: After cathodal tDCS, SWI increased compared to baseline EEG and sham EEG in 3 patients, and after anodal tDCS, SWI increased in 2 patients. Although the SWI values did not change significantly, 8 patients reported subjectively that the applications were beneficial for them and that they experienced less discomfort during photic stimulation after the sessions. There were no side effects except transient skin rash in one patient, only. Conclusions: In our sham controlled tCDS study with both cathodal and anodal stimulation, our data showed that there was no significant change in SWI during IPS, despite subjective well-being. tDCS’ modulatory effect does not seem to act in the acute phase on EEG parameters after photic stimulation.