4.6 Article

Remediation of sleep-deprivation-induced working memory impairment with fMRI-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation

Journal

CEREBRAL CORTEX
Volume 18, Issue 9, Pages 2077-2085

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhm231

Keywords

facilitation; fMRI; sleep deprivation; TMS; working memory

Categories

Funding

  1. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Award [DAAD 19-02-0047]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was applied to test the role of selected cortical regions in remediating sleep-deprivation-induced deficits in visual working memory (WM) performance. Three rTMS targets were chosen using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)-identified network associated with sleep-deprivation-induced WM performance impairment: 2 regions from the network (upper left middle occipital gyrus and midline parietal cortex) and 1 nonnetwork region (lower left middle occipital gyrus). Fifteen participants underwent total sleep deprivation for 48 h. rTMS was applied at 5 Hz during a WM task in a within-subject sham-controlled design. The rTMS to the upper-middle occipital site resulted in a reduction of the sleep-induced reaction time deficit without a corresponding decrease in accuracy, whereas stimulation at the other sites did not. Each subject had undergone fMRI scanning while performing the task both pre- and postsleep deprivation, and the degree to which each individual activated the flVIRI network was measured. The degree of performance enhancement with upper-middle occipital rTMS correlated with the degree to which each individual failed to sustain network activation. No effects were found in a subset of participants who performed the same rTMS procedure after recovering from sleep deprivation, suggesting that the performance enhancements seen following sleep deprivation were state dependent.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available