4.3 Article

Transcranial direct current stimulation in obsessive-compulsive disorder: emerging clinical evidence and considerations for optimal montage of electrodes

Journal

EXPERT REVIEW OF MEDICAL DEVICES
Volume 12, Issue 4, Pages 381-391

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1586/17434440.2015.1037832

Keywords

computer-based modeling; non-invasive brain stimulation; obsessive-compulsive disorder; repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; transcranial direct current stimulation

Funding

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R41 NS076123] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Neuromodulation techniques for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) treatment have expanded with greater understanding of the brain circuits involved. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) might be a potential new treatment for OCD, although the optimal montage is unclear. Objective: To perform a systematic review on meta-analyses of repetitive transcranianal magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) trials for OCD, aiming to identify brain stimulation targets for future tDCS trials and to support the empirical evidence with computer head modeling analysis. Methods: Systematic reviews of rTMS and DBS trials on OCD in Pubmed/MEDLINE were searched. For the tDCS computational analysis, we employed head models with the goal of optimally targeting current delivery to structures of interest. Results: Only three references matched our eligibility criteria. We simulated four different electrodes montages and analyzed current direction and intensity. Conclusion: Although DBS, rTMS and tDCS are not directly comparable and our theoretical model, based on DBS and rTMS targets, needs empirical validation, we found that the tDCS montage with the cathode over the pre-supplementary motor area and extra-cephalic anode seems to activate most of the areas related to OCD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available