Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2008 Dec 24;28(52):14147-55.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4248-08.2008.

Increasing human brain excitability by transcranial high-frequency random noise stimulation

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Increasing human brain excitability by transcranial high-frequency random noise stimulation

Daniella Terney et al. J Neurosci. .

Abstract

For >20 years, noninvasive transcranial stimulation techniques like repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been used to induce neuroplastic-like effects in the human cortex, leading to the activity-dependent modification of synaptic transmission. Here, we introduce a novel method of electrical stimulation: transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), whereby a random electrical oscillation spectrum is applied over the motor cortex. tRNS induces consistent excitability increases lasting 60 min after stimulation. These effects have been observed in 80 subjects through both physiological measures and behavioral tasks. Higher frequencies (100-640 Hz) appear to be responsible for generating this excitability increase, an effect that may be attributed to the repeated opening of Na(+) channels. In terms of efficacy tRNS appears to possess at least the same therapeutic potential as rTMS/tDCS in diseases such as depression, while furthermore avoiding the constraint of current flow direction sensitivity characteristic of tDCS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The output signal of DC-Stimulator PLUS, as a frequency distribution of the signal, the time plot of the signal, and a histogram. The signal was generated by a computer. In the stimulation mode “noise,” there is a random level of current generated for every sample (sampling rate 1280 samples/s). The random numbers are normally distributed; the probability density function follows a bell-shaped curve. The amplitude of 1 mA pp means that 99% of all generated amplitude values were between +500 μA and −500 μA.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Effect of 10 min RN stimulation on motor-evoked potentials. Time course of motor cortex excitability changes lasting for 60 min after stimulation, shown after 10 min RN stimulation over M1 at 1 mA compared with sham stimulation. The figure shows mean amplitudes and their SEMs up to 60 min (including all subjects, n = 17) and between 90 min and 24 h (including 8 subjects). Asterisks indicate significant differences between MEP amplitudes after 5 and 10–60 min after stimulation and those at baseline.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Effect of 10 min of low (0.1–100 Hz)- and high (101–640 Hz)-frequency RN stimulation on motor-evoked potentials. Time course of motor cortex excitability changes lasting for 60 min after stimulation, shown after 10 min of high-frequency RN stimulation over M1 at 1 mA compared with low-frequency and sham stimulation. The figure shows mean amplitudes and their SEMs up to 60 min (including all subjects, n = 12).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
tRNS of the primary motor cortex improves implicit motor learning in its early phase. Reaction times decrease faster in the tRNS condition when compared with the sham stimulation condition (top). Moreover, the RT difference comparing blocks 5 and 6, which indicates implicit sequence learning, is bigger for the tRNS condition, when compared with sham condition. The asterisk indicates a significant difference regarding reaction time differences between blocks 5 and 6 between RN and sham stimulation. In 1 and 2 h after stimulation, this significant difference was no longer detectable (bottom panels).

References

    1. Abascal JF, Arridge SR, Atkinson D, Horesh R, Fabrizi L, De Lucia M, Horesh L, Bayford RH, Holder DS. Use of anisotropic modelling in electrical impedance tomography; description of method and preliminary assessment of utility in imaging brain function in the adult human brain. Neuroimage. 2008;43:258–268. - PubMed
    1. Antal A, Terney D, Poreisz C, Paulus W. Towards unravelling task-related modulations of neuroplastic changes induced in the human motor cortex. Eur J Neurosci. 2007;26:2687–2691. - PubMed
    1. Antal A, Boros K, Poreisz C, Chaieb L, Terney D, Paulus W. Comparatively weak after-effects of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) on cortical excitability in humans. Brain Stim. 2008;1:97–105. - PubMed
    1. Barker AT, Jalinous R, Freeston IL. Non-invasive magnetic stimulation of human motor cortex. Lancet. 1985;1:1106–1107. - PubMed
    1. Bindman LJ, Lippold OCJ, Redfearn JWT. The action of brief polarizing currents on the cerebral cortex of the rat (1) during current flow and (2) in the production of long-lasting after-effects. J Physiol. 1964;172:369–382. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources