Abstract
Purpose: We compared the effect of three different transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) protocols delivered to the occipital lobe on peripheral vision in patients with glaucoma.
Methods: A double-masked, placebo-controlled study was conducted with 35 patients with glaucoma. We compared three different tES protocols: anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), and transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) against sham stimulation. Each patient attended four stimulation sessions (a-tDCS, tACS, tRNS, and sham) in a random order with at least 48 hours between visits. Stimulation involved placing an anodal electrode over the occipital lobe (Oz) and cathodal electrode on the cheek for 20 minutes. High-resolution perimetry (HRP) and multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) measurements were made before and immediately after stimulation. Changes in HRP detection accuracy/reaction time and mfVEP signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)/latency were analyzed using linear mixed models.
Results: Compared to sham, HRP detection accuracy was significantly improved after a-tDCS in both the central 20-degree (b = 0.032, P = 0.018) and peripheral analysis (b = 0.051, P = 0.002). Additionally, mfVEP SNR was significantly increased (b = 0.016, P = 0.017) and the latency was shortened (b = −1.405, P = 0.04) by the a-tDCS in the central 20-degree analysis. In the peripheral analysis, there was a trend toward an enhancement of SNR after a-tDCS stimulation (b = 0.014, P = 0.052), but it did not reach statistical significance; latency was increased after tACS (b = 1.623, P = 0.041). No significant effects were found in comparison to other active tES protocols.
Conclusions: A single session of a-tDCS enhances perceptual and electrophysiologic measures of vision in patients with glaucoma. However, the small magnitude of changes observed in HRP (3.2% for accuracy in central and 5.1% in peripheral) did not exceed previous test variability and may not be clinically meaningful.
Translational Relevance: a-tDCS holds promise as a potential treatment for enhancing visual function. However, future studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects and clinical relevance of this intervention using validated measures of perimetric changes in the visual field.
Methods: A double-masked, placebo-controlled study was conducted with 35 patients with glaucoma. We compared three different tES protocols: anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), and transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) against sham stimulation. Each patient attended four stimulation sessions (a-tDCS, tACS, tRNS, and sham) in a random order with at least 48 hours between visits. Stimulation involved placing an anodal electrode over the occipital lobe (Oz) and cathodal electrode on the cheek for 20 minutes. High-resolution perimetry (HRP) and multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) measurements were made before and immediately after stimulation. Changes in HRP detection accuracy/reaction time and mfVEP signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)/latency were analyzed using linear mixed models.
Results: Compared to sham, HRP detection accuracy was significantly improved after a-tDCS in both the central 20-degree (b = 0.032, P = 0.018) and peripheral analysis (b = 0.051, P = 0.002). Additionally, mfVEP SNR was significantly increased (b = 0.016, P = 0.017) and the latency was shortened (b = −1.405, P = 0.04) by the a-tDCS in the central 20-degree analysis. In the peripheral analysis, there was a trend toward an enhancement of SNR after a-tDCS stimulation (b = 0.014, P = 0.052), but it did not reach statistical significance; latency was increased after tACS (b = 1.623, P = 0.041). No significant effects were found in comparison to other active tES protocols.
Conclusions: A single session of a-tDCS enhances perceptual and electrophysiologic measures of vision in patients with glaucoma. However, the small magnitude of changes observed in HRP (3.2% for accuracy in central and 5.1% in peripheral) did not exceed previous test variability and may not be clinically meaningful.
Translational Relevance: a-tDCS holds promise as a potential treatment for enhancing visual function. However, future studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects and clinical relevance of this intervention using validated measures of perimetric changes in the visual field.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 25 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-13 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Translational Vision Science and Technology |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 20 Sept 2024 |
Keywords
- transcranial electrical stimulation (tES)
- visual function
- peripheral field loss
- vision rehabilitation