Cargando…

Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial

A prior study showed that rhythmic, but not arrhythmic, 12 Hz stimulation of the median nerve (MNS) entrained sensorimotor cortex EEG signal, and found that 10 Hz MNS improved tics in Tourette syndrome (TS). However, no control condition was tested and stimulation blocks lasted only 1 minute. We set...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Iverson, Ann M., Arbuckle, Amanda L., Ueda, Keisuke, Song, David Y., Bihun, Emily C., Koller, Jonathan M., Wallendorf, Michael, Black, Kevin J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9915823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36778375
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.01.23285304
_version_ 1784885979534852096
author Iverson, Ann M.
Arbuckle, Amanda L.
Ueda, Keisuke
Song, David Y.
Bihun, Emily C.
Koller, Jonathan M.
Wallendorf, Michael
Black, Kevin J.
author_facet Iverson, Ann M.
Arbuckle, Amanda L.
Ueda, Keisuke
Song, David Y.
Bihun, Emily C.
Koller, Jonathan M.
Wallendorf, Michael
Black, Kevin J.
author_sort Iverson, Ann M.
collection PubMed
description A prior study showed that rhythmic, but not arrhythmic, 12 Hz stimulation of the median nerve (MNS) entrained sensorimotor cortex EEG signal, and found that 10 Hz MNS improved tics in Tourette syndrome (TS). However, no control condition was tested and stimulation blocks lasted only 1 minute. We set out to replicate the TS results and to test whether tic improvement occurs by the proposed cortical entrainment mechanism. Thirty-two people with TS, age 15-64, completed two study visits with repeated MNS on and off blocks in random order, one visit for rhythmic and one for arrhythmic MNS. Subjects and staff were blind to order; a video rater was additionally blind to stimulation and to order of visits and blocks. Rhythmic MNS at 10 Hz improved tics. Both rhythmic and arrhythmic 12 Hz MNS improved tic frequency, intensity and urges without significant difference. Participant masking was effective and there was no carryover effect. Several participants described dramatic benefit. Discomfort was minimal. MNS benefit did not persist after the end of stimulation. These results replicate the tic benefit from MNS, but show that the EEG entrainment hypothesis cannot explain that benefit. Another electrophysiological mechanism may explain benefit; alternatively, these data do not exclude a placebo effect.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9915823
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99158232023-02-11 Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial Iverson, Ann M. Arbuckle, Amanda L. Ueda, Keisuke Song, David Y. Bihun, Emily C. Koller, Jonathan M. Wallendorf, Michael Black, Kevin J. medRxiv Article A prior study showed that rhythmic, but not arrhythmic, 12 Hz stimulation of the median nerve (MNS) entrained sensorimotor cortex EEG signal, and found that 10 Hz MNS improved tics in Tourette syndrome (TS). However, no control condition was tested and stimulation blocks lasted only 1 minute. We set out to replicate the TS results and to test whether tic improvement occurs by the proposed cortical entrainment mechanism. Thirty-two people with TS, age 15-64, completed two study visits with repeated MNS on and off blocks in random order, one visit for rhythmic and one for arrhythmic MNS. Subjects and staff were blind to order; a video rater was additionally blind to stimulation and to order of visits and blocks. Rhythmic MNS at 10 Hz improved tics. Both rhythmic and arrhythmic 12 Hz MNS improved tic frequency, intensity and urges without significant difference. Participant masking was effective and there was no carryover effect. Several participants described dramatic benefit. Discomfort was minimal. MNS benefit did not persist after the end of stimulation. These results replicate the tic benefit from MNS, but show that the EEG entrainment hypothesis cannot explain that benefit. Another electrophysiological mechanism may explain benefit; alternatively, these data do not exclude a placebo effect. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023-02-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9915823/ /pubmed/36778375 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.01.23285304 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use.
spellingShingle Article
Iverson, Ann M.
Arbuckle, Amanda L.
Ueda, Keisuke
Song, David Y.
Bihun, Emily C.
Koller, Jonathan M.
Wallendorf, Michael
Black, Kevin J.
Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial
title Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial
title_full Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial
title_fullStr Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial
title_full_unstemmed Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial
title_short Peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat Tourette syndrome: A randomized crossover trial
title_sort peripheral nerve induction of inhibitory brain circuits to treat tourette syndrome: a randomized crossover trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9915823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36778375
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.01.23285304
work_keys_str_mv AT iversonannm peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT arbuckleamandal peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT uedakeisuke peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT songdavidy peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT bihunemilyc peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT kollerjonathanm peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT wallendorfmichael peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial
AT blackkevinj peripheralnerveinductionofinhibitorybraincircuitstotreattourettesyndromearandomizedcrossovertrial