Cortical thickness is related to working memory performance after non-invasive brain stimulation

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_RAZZA_Cortical_thickness_is_related_to_working_memory_performance_2023.PDF (289.43 KB)
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2023
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ASSOC BRAS DIVULG CIENTIFICA
Autores
RAZZA, L. B.
VANDERHASSELT, M. A.
REPPLE, J.
Citação
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL AND BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH, v.56, article ID e12945, 8p, 2023
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) probing the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has been shown to have little effect on working memory. The variability of NIBS responses might be explained by inter-subject brain anatomical variability. We investigated whether baseline cortical brain thickness of regions of interest was associated with working memory performance after NIBS by performing a secondary analysis of previously published research. Structural magnetic resonance imaging data were analyzed from healthy subjects who received transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS), and placebo. Twenty-two participants were randomly assigned to receive all the interventions in a random order. The working memory task was conducted after the end of each NIBS session. Regions of interest were the bilateral DLPFC, medial prefrontal cortex, and posterior cingulate cortex. Overall, 66 NIBS sessions were performed. Findings revealed a negative significant association between cortical thickness of the bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and reaction time for both tDCS (left: P=0.045, right: P=0.037) and iTBS (left: P=0.007, right: P=0.007) compared to placebo. A significant positive association was found for iTBS and posterior cingulate cortex (P=0.03). No association was found for accuracy. Our findings provide the first evidence that individual cortical thickness of healthy subjects might be associated with working memory performance following different NIBS interventions. Therefore, cortical thickness could explain -to some extent -the heterogeneous effects of NIBS probing the DLPFC.
Palavras-chave
Non-invasive brain stimulation, Cortical thickness, Individualization, Working memory, Voxel-based morphometry
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/57509
Referências
  1. [Anonymous], 2013, DSM-5 Diagnostic Classification Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
  2. Baddeley AD, 1986, Working Memory, P289
  3. Bai SW, 2014, NEUROIMAGE, V87, P332, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.015
  4. Boes AD, 2018, BRAIN STIMUL, V11, P575, DOI 10.1016/j.brs.2018.01.029
  5. Brunoni AR, 2019, BRAZ J PSYCHIAT, V41, P70, DOI 10.1590/1516-4446-2017-0018
  6. Brunoni AR, 2014, BRAIN COGNITION, V86, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.bandc.2014.01.008
  7. Bulubas L, 2019, BRAIN STIMUL, V12, P1197, DOI 10.1016/j.brs.2019.05.006
  8. Cattaneo Z, 2008, EUR J NEUROSCI, V28, P1924, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06466.x
  9. Caulfield KA, 2022, NEUROMODULATION, V25, P578, DOI 10.1111/ner.13342
  10. Clarke PJF, 2020, COGN AFFECT BEHAV NE, V20, P1323, DOI 10.3758/s13415-020-00840-2
  11. Dahnke R, 2013, NEUROIMAGE, V65, P336, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.09.050
  12. de Boer NS, 2021, NEUROSCI BIOBEHAV R, V125, P122, DOI 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.01.013
  13. Destrieux C, 2010, NEUROIMAGE, V53, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.010
  14. Ehrlich S, 2012, SCHIZOPHRENIA BULL, V38, P1050, DOI 10.1093/schbul/sbr018
  15. Filmer HL, 2019, NEUROIMAGE, V196, P41, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.04.026
  16. Fox MD, 2012, BIOL PSYCHIAT, V72, P595, DOI 10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.04.028
  17. Hallett M, 2007, NEURON, V55, P187, DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.06.026
  18. Hampson M, 2010, MAGN RESON IMAGING, V28, P1051, DOI 10.1016/j.mri.2010.03.021
  19. Hampson M, 2006, J NEUROSCI, V26, P13338, DOI 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3408-06.2006
  20. Herbsman T, 2011, BRAIN STIMUL, V4, P300, DOI 10.1016/j.brs.2011.01.004
  21. Indahlastari A, 2021, BRAIN STIMUL, V14, P1205, DOI 10.1016/j.brs.2021.08.003
  22. Jorge RE, 2008, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V65, P268, DOI 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2007.45
  23. Krogsrud SK, 2021, DEV COGN NEUROS-NETH, V51, DOI 10.1016/j.dcn.2021.100997
  24. Li XQ, 2022, NEUROIMAGE, V255, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119204
  25. Metzler-Baddeley C, 2016, NEUROIMAGE, V130, P48, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.01.007
  26. Monks PJ, 2004, BIPOLAR DISORD, V6, P550, DOI 10.1111/j.1399-5618.2004.00147.x
  27. Nikolin S, 2021, J AFFECT DISORDERS, V284, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2021.01.084
  28. Nitsche MA, 2000, J PHYSIOL-LONDON, V527, P633, DOI 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x
  29. Polania R, 2018, NAT NEUROSCI, V21, P174, DOI 10.1038/s41593-017-0054-4
  30. Razza LB, 2023, INT J CLIN HLTH PSYC, V23, DOI 10.1016/j.ijchp.2022.100334
  31. Razza LB, 2022, BIOMEDICINES, V10, DOI 10.3390/biomedicines10102410
  32. Schwarz CG, 2016, NEUROIMAGE-CLIN, V11, P802, DOI 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.05.017
  33. Suen PJC, 2021, EUR ARCH PSY CLIN N, V271, P101, DOI 10.1007/s00406-020-01127-w
  34. van der Wee NJA, 2003, NEUROIMAGE, V20, P2271, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.05.001
  35. Whelan R, 2008, PSYCHOL REC, V58, P475, DOI 10.1007/BF03395630
  36. Wischnewski M, 2021, NEUROSCI BIOBEHAV R, V130, P147, DOI 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.08.017
  37. Yotter RA, 2011, HUM BRAIN MAPP, V32, P1109, DOI 10.1002/hbm.21095

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MPS
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCM
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MDR
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/21
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/27
Carregar mais