1.
Ruppert MC, Greuel A, Tahmasian M, et al. Network degeneration in Parkinson's
disease: multimodal imaging of nigro-striato-cortical dysfunction. Brain 2020;143:944-959.
2.
Fasano A, Aquino CC, Krauss JK, Honey CR, Bloem BR. Axial disability and deep brain
stimulation in patients with Parkinson disease. Nat Rev Neurol 2015;11:98-110.
3.
Beretta VS, Conceicao NR, Nobrega-Sousa P, et al. Transcranial direct current
stimulation combined with physical or cognitive training in people with Parkinson's disease: a
systematic review. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2020;17:74.
4.
Kim YW, Shin IS, Moon HI, Lee SC, Yoon SY. Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation
on freezing of gait in parkinsonism: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Parkinsonism Relat
Disord 2019;64:82-89.
5.
Costa-Ribeiro A, Maux A, Bosford T, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation
associated with gait training in Parkinson's disease: A pilot randomized clinical trial. Dev
Neurorehabil 2017;20:121-128.
6.
Schulz R, Gerloff C, Hummel FC. Non-invasive brain stimulation in neurological
diseases. Neuropharmacology 2013;64:579-587.
7.
Koganemaru S, Mikami Y, Maezawa H, et al. Anodal transcranial patterned stimulation
of the motor cortex during gait can induce activity-dependent corticospinal plasticity to alter
human gait. PLoS One 2018;13:e0208691.
8.
Koganemaru S, Kitatani R, Fukushima-Maeda A, et al. Gait-Synchronized Rhythmic
Brain Stimulation Improves Poststroke Gait Disturbance: A Pilot Study. Stroke 2019;50:32053212.
9.
Groppa S, Bergmann TO, Siems C, Molle M, Marshall L, Siebner HR. Slow-oscillatory
transcranial direct current stimulation can induce bidirectional shifts in motor cortical excitability
in awake humans. Neuroscience 2010;166:1219-1225.
10.
Mori S, Matsui T, Kuze B, Asanome M, Nakajima K, Matsuyama K. Stimulation of a
restricted region in the midline cerebellar white matter evokes coordinated quadrupedal
locomotion in the decerebrate cat. J Neurophysiol 1999;82:290-300.
11.
Fukuyama H, Ouchi Y, Matsuzaki S, et al. Brain functional activity during gait in normal
subjects: a SPECT study. Neurosci Lett 1997;228:183-186.
12.
Hanakawa T, Katsumi Y, Fukuyama H, et al. Mechanisms underlying gait disturbance in
Parkinson's disease: a single photon emission computed tomography study. Brain 1999;122 ( Pt
7):1271-1282.
13.
Yamanouchi H, Nagura H. Neurological signs and frontal white matter lesions in vascular
parkinsonism. A clinicopathologic study. Stroke 1997;28:965-969.
PAGE 26 14.
Armstrong MJ, Litvan I, Lang AE, et al. Criteria for the diagnosis of corticobasal
degeneration. Neurology 2013;80:496-503.
15.
Litvan I, Agid Y, Calne D, et al. Clinical research criteria for the diagnosis of progressive
supranuclear palsy (Steele-Richardson-Olszewski syndrome): report of the NINDS-SPSP
international workshop. Neurology 1996;47:1-9.
16.
Gilman S, Wenning GK, Low PA, et al. Second consensus statement on the diagnosis of
multiple system atrophy. Neurology 2008;71:670-676.
17.
Kitatani R, Koganemaru S, Maeda A, et al. Gait-synchronized oscillatory brain
stimulation modulates common neural drives to ankle muscles in patients after stroke: A pilot study.
Neurosci Res 2020;156:256-264.
18.
Kitatani R, Koganemaru S, Maeda A, et al. Gait-combined transcranial alternating
current stimulation modulates cortical control of muscle activities during gait. Eur J Neurosci
2020;52:4791-4802.
19.
Awad LN, Palmer JA, Pohlig RT, Binder-Macleod SA, Reisman DS. Walking speed and
step length asymmetry modify the energy cost of walking after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair
2015;29:416-423.
20.
Ali MM, Sellers KK, Frohlich F. Transcranial alternating current stimulation modulates
large-scale cortical network activity by network resonance. J Neurosci 2013;33:11262-11275.
21.
Reato D, Rahman A, Bikson M, Parra LC. Effects of weak transcranial alternating current
stimulation on brain activity-a review of known mechanisms from animal studies. Front Hum
Neurosci 2013;7:687.
22.
Zivanovic M, Bjekic J, Konstantinovic U, Filipovic SR. Effects of online parietal
transcranial electric stimulation on associative memory: a direct comparison between tDCS, theta
tACS, and theta-oscillatory tDCS. Sci Rep 2022;12:14091.
23.
Naro A, Bramanti A, Leo A, et al. Effects of cerebellar transcranial alternating current
stimulation on motor cortex excitability and motor function. Brain Struct Funct 2017;222:28912906.
24.
Asanome M, Matsuyama K, Mori S. Augmentation of postural muscle tone induced by
the stimulation of the descending fibers in the midline area of the cerebellar white matter in the
acute decerebrate cat. Neurosci Res 1998;30:257-269.
25.
Bostan AC, Dum RP, Strick PL. The basal ganglia communicate with the cerebellum.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010;107:8452-8456.
26.
Wu T, Hallett M. The cerebellum in Parkinson's disease. Brain 2013;136:696-709.
27.
Bedard P, Sanes JN. On a basal ganglia role in learning and rehearsing visual-motor
associations. Neuroimage 2009;47:1701-1710.
28.
Takeuchi Y, Berenyi A. Oscillotherapeutics - Time-targeted interventions in epilepsy and
PAGE 27 beyond. Neurosci Res 2020;152:87-107.
29.
Takeuchi Y, Harangozo M, Pedraza L, et al. Closed-loop stimulation of the medial
septum terminates epileptic seizures. Brain 2021;144:885-908.
30.
Franca C, de Andrade DC, Teixeira MJ, et al. Effects of cerebellar neuromodulation in
movement disorders: A systematic review. Brain Stimul 2018;11:249-260.
31.
Weiss D, Schoellmann A, Fox MD, et al. Freezing of gait: understanding the complexity
of an enigmatic phenomenon. Brain 2020;143:14-30.
32.
Wang M, Jiang S, Yuan Y, et al. Alterations of functional and structural connectivity of
freezing of gait in Parkinson's disease. J Neurol 2016;263:1583-1592.
33.
Ballanger B, Lozano AM, Moro E, et al. Cerebral blood flow changes induced by
pedunculopontine nucleus stimulation in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: a [(15)O]
H2O PET study. Hum Brain Mapp 2009;30:3901-3909.
34.
Martinez-Fernandez R, Rodriguez-Rojas R, Del Alamo M, et al. Focused ultrasound
subthalamotomy in patients with asymmetric Parkinson's disease: a pilot study. Lancet Neurol
2018;17:54-63.
35.
Ferrucci R, Bocci T, Cortese F, Ruggiero F, Priori A. . Cerebellum Ataxias 2016;3:16.
36.
Kaski D, Dominguez RO, Allum JH, Islam AF, Bronstein AM. Combining physical
training with transcranial direct current stimulation to improve gait in Parkinson's disease: a pilot
randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil 2014;28:1115-1124.
37.
Manenti R, Brambilla M, Benussi A, et al. Mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's
disease is improved by transcranial direct current stimulation combined with physical therapy.
Mov Disord 2016;31:715-724.
38.
Ferrucci R, Cortese F, Bianchi M, et al. Cerebellar and Motor Cortical Transcranial
Stimulation Decrease Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesias in Parkinson's Disease. Cerebellum
2016;15:43-47.
39.
Workman CD, Fietsam AC, Uc EY, Rudroff T. Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current
Stimulation in People with Parkinson's Disease: A Pilot Study. Brain Sci 2020;10.
40.
Ueki Y, Mima T, Kotb MA, et al. Altered plasticity of the human motor cortex in
Parkinson's disease. Ann Neurol 2006;59:60-71.
TABLES
Table 1. Baseline patients’ characteristic
Group
Age
Diagnosis
Sex
Stim Freq (Hz)
Duration(m)
Yahr
UPDRS III
Domi
MMSE
FOGQ
LEDD (mg)
Real
64
PD
1.02
144
38
30
17
519
76
PD
1.08
66
14
23
500
58
CBS
1.23
29
30
30
300
78
CVD
0.67
58
29
18
80
CBS
1.05
12
22
29
400
69
PD
1.04
18
17
29
14
250
53
PD
0.96
27
11
30
10
200
63
PD
0.92
53
18
29
300
68
PD
1.03
64
22
30
13
200
76
PD
1.05
116
20
28
18
325
79
SCD
0.59
79
14
30
16
73
CVD
0.98
48
18
28
11
73
PD
53
12
25
350
61
PD
48
22
29
300
45
CBS
45
22
30
15
250
70
PD
45
24
24
540
66
PD
132
31
29
14
739
80
PSP
21
34
13
200
80
PD
18
23
200
71
PD
29
17
29
11
200
54
PD
71
30
66
PD
157
38
30
11
589
86
SCD
132
31
30
550
Sham
PAGE 29 5
Data are presented as mean (SD) or n. MDS-UPDRS= Movement Disorders Society-Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale. According to both the dyskinesia rating scale (items
1-11 for on-dyskinesia and 12-15 for off-dystonia) and the MDS-UPDRS IV. Off-medication dystonia in all patients was restricted to the most affected side of the body. The MDS-
UPDRS III scores range from 0 to 108, with higher scores indicating more severe clinical features. The off-medication state was defined as a minimum 12 h overnight withdrawal
of standard-release anti-parkinsonian drugs and a 24 h withdrawal of prolonged-release anti-parkinsonian drugs. The on-medication state was defined by both the patient and clinician,
indicating that the medication had been effective for at least 30 min after intake.
10
11
12
13
FIGURE LEGENDS
14
15
Figure 1. Experimental protocol: In the tES gait condition, electrical current was delivered with a
16
sinusoidal waveform with 2 mA peak. Each current started at the time of heel contact on the severe side
17
during a self-paced 4 min gait. The active electrode (5×5 cm) was applied 3 cm left or right from the inion
18
for cerebellum stimulation. The counter electrode was placed over the opposite position to stimulate the
19
cerebellum.
20
21
Figure 2. Gait parameters: Effects of 10 times administration of intervention on gait parameters. A) The
22
speed of the comfortable pace, B) length of stride in the comfortable pace, C) ratio of the swing phase on
23
the severe side, D) symmetry index in swing phase time, E) ratio of stance phase on the severe side were
24
improved after the tES gait intervention, compared with those after sham intervention.
25
26
Figure 3. Freezing of Gait Questionnaire: The effects of tES or sham stimulation on self-reported severity of
27
freezing of gait (FOG). Participants were asked to rate their change in FOG severity using a Likert scale
28
ranging from 0 to 24 points, showing that higher scores correspond to more severe FOG. The tES
29
synchronized with gait intervention showed significant improvement in FOG after the intervention.
30
31
A)
Time
160
B)
C)
Pre
0.80
Time
Pre
Post
Post
0.40
Stance phase time (s)
120
Swing phase time (s)
Gait Speed(cm/s)
0.75
100
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.70
0.65
Time
80
0.60
Pre
Post
0.20
Real
Sham
Real
Intervention
D)
E)
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
stride length (cm)
Symmetry Index
0.56
0.54
100
0.52
50
0.50
Sham
Intervention
Real
Sham
Intervention
Sham
Intervention
Time
Time
Real
Real
Sham
Intervention
Time
Pre
Post
FOGQ score
15
10
Real
Sham
Intervention
...
論文の公開元へ
