A systematic review on the therapeutic effectiveness of non-invasive brain stimulation for the treatment of anxiety disorders

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.12.012Get rights and content

Highlights

  • The amount of non-invasive brain stimulation studies for treatment of anxiety disorders is relatively low.

  • Respective data provide preliminary evidence for clinical efficacy.

  • Left excitatory, and right inhibitory stimulation are most promising approaches.

  • The results are compatible with specific counter-regulation of pathological up-/downregulation in anxiety-related networks.

Abstract

The interest in the use of non-invasive brain stimulation for enhancing neural functions and reducing symptoms in anxiety disorders is growing. Based on the DSM-V classification for anxiety disorders, we examined all available research using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for the treatment of specific phobias, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia, and generalized anxiety disorder. A systematic literature search conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar databases provided 26 results: 12 sham-controlled studies and 15 not sham-controlled studies. With regard to the latter sub-group of studies, 9 were case reports, and 6 open label studies. Overall, our work provides preliminary evidence that both, excitatory stimulation of the left prefrontal cortex and inhibitory stimulation of the right prefrontal cortex can reduce symptom severity in anxiety disorders. The current results are discussed in the light of a model for the treatment for anxiety disorders via non-invasive brain stimulation, which is based on up-/downregulation mechanisms and might serve as guide for future systematic investigations in the field.

Introduction

Exploring new avenues for the treatment of mental disorders through non-pharmacological and/or non-invasive intervention approaches is of growing interest in the neuroscience community. This interest is motivated by the hope to deal with drug-treatment resistant disorders, to provide effective treatments in case of concurrent medical conditions that prevent standard treatments and to enhance efficacy of therapies by combining standard treatment approaches with non-invasive brain stimulation. One goal of research endeavours is to identify methodologies for the management of neuropsychiatric disorders that combine both therapeutic efficacy and tolerability. Since pathologically altered neural plasticity is an important component of many neurological and psychiatric diseases, non-invasive stimulation of the brain is an potential treatment option, as it is able to modulate neural activity (e.g., Kronberg et al., 2017; Ziemann,2017) by acting on synaptic plasticity (Fritsch et al., 2010; Kronberg et al., 2017; Nitsche et al., 2012b). The precise underlying mechanisms of non-invasive brain stimulation-induced synaptic plasticity have still to be clarified. Yet, evidence suggests that respective plasticity is linked to long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) (e.g., Monte-Silva et al., 2013; Nitsche et al., 2003; see also Bliss and Cooke, 2011).

Several review articles suggest therapeutic efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation for the treatment of a wide range of neurological and psychiatric disorders, such as depression (Mutz et al., 2018), addiction (Feil and Zangen, 2010) and epilepsy (Cooper et al., 2018) in both pediatric and adult populations. For more extensive reviews in the field see also (Flöel, 2014; Kuo et al., 2014; Martin et al., 2017; Rivera-Urbina Guadalupe et al., 2017;Vicario and Nitsche, 2013a, Vicario and Nitsche, 2013bb). In the current article, we aim to provide a systematic review on therapeutic effects of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), on anxiety disorders in adult populations, such as specific phobias (SP), social anxiety disorder (SAD), panic disorder (PD), agoraphobia, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). In the context of this review, it is worthwhile noting that post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are no longer listed under the anxiety disorders category by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) Fifth Edition (Association, A.P., 2014, 2014; see also (Craske et al., 2017). We did not examine the effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on these syndromes because these disorders have been comprehensively addressed in several recent systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses (e.g., Berlim et al., 2013; Brunelin et al., 2018; Yan et al., 2017; Zhou et al., 2017).

We provide a brief introduction concerning the basic physiological principles underlying the effects of the mentioned non-invasive brain stimulation techniques. However, is not an aim of this review to address this aspect in detail. More exhaustive/detailed overviews are provided by several specialized reviews in the field (Klomjai et al., 2015a, b; Polanía et al., 2018; Valero-Cabré et al., 2017; Woods et al., 2016; Yavari et al., 2018).

tDCS is a well-established neurostimulation technique that allows stimulation of the cerebral cortex in a safe and non-invasive way. Stimulation is conducted via two or more electrodes with opposite polarities (i.e., anodal and cathodal) placed on the scalp and connected with a battery-driven constant current stimulator with a maximum output in the milliampere (mA) range. A relatively weak electrical direct current (usually 1 ∼ 2 mA) is applied via the electrodes, and a proportion of it enters the brain (Nitsche et al., 2008, 2003; Nitsche and Paulus, 2000). At the macroscopic level, anodal (A) stimulation increases cortical excitability, whereas cathodal (C) stimulation decreases it (Stagg and Nitsche, 2011). However, the impact and directionality of the effects of tDCS on cortical excitability are also influenced by stimulation intensity, as suggested by the study by Batsikadze et al. (2013) where both anodal and cathodal tDCS at 2 mA increased corticospinal excitability, whereas 1 mA cathodal tDCS decreased it. The effects on cortical excitability can last for up to 90 min after a single stimulation session of 13 ∼ 20 min duration (Nitsche and Paulus, 2000), and can be further extended by repeated stimulation (i.e., cumulative effects) (Monte-Silva et al., 2013). The physiological aftereffects of prolonged (i.e., application for several minutes) anodal and cathodal tDCS are dependent on synaptic modulation. This assumption is supported by pharmacological studies in humans (Nitsche et al., 2012a) and animal models (Fritsch et al., 2010; Kronberg et al., 2017). For example, enhanced long-term potentiation (LTP) in basal dendrites of rat hippocampal slices has been documented in response to anodal stimulation (Kronberg et al., 2017). Anodal stimulation increases intracortical facilitation (ICF), and its after-effects are prevented by NMDA receptor blockade, but enhanced by respective receptor agonists (Liebetanz et al., 2002; Nitsche et al., 2003, 2004; Nitsche et al., 2005). NMDA receptor block can also prevent cathodal tDCS-generated after-effects (Nitsche et al., 2003). Given the role of the glutamatergic receptor on ICF (Keller, 1993), it can, therefore, be assumed that glutamatergic neurons are crucial for the induction of plasticity by tDCS. Moreover, tDCS-induced glutamatergic plasticity might be prompted by tDCS-generated alterations of GABA activity. This is suggested by a magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) study documenting a reduction of GABA content of the motor cortex (Stagg et al., 2009) following both anodal and cathodal tDCS.

rTMS is another non-invasive and safe brain stimulation technique based on the application of trains of magnetic pulses over a target cortical region, through the use of a copper coil placed over the scalp, which induces electrical pulses at the brain level. The application of trains of multiple pulses of TMS with a short inter-stimulus interval induces a long-lasting change on cortical excitability (Pascual-Leone et al., 1994). In this regard, it is important to distinguish between low and high-frequency rTMS. Generally speaking, appropriate intensity of low frequency (1–5 Hz) rTMS decreases cortical excitability, while an appropriate intensity of high-frequency rTMS (> 5 Hz) increases cortical excitability (Pell et al., 2011). Theta Burst stimulation (TBS) is another rTMS protocol, which induces similar effects as conventional rTMS, but requires less time. Generally speaking, Intermittent TBS (iTBS) produces excitatory effects, whereas continuous TBS (cTBS) produces a reduction of cortical excitability (Li et al., 2014). LTP- and LTD-like mechanisms seem to be involved also in rTMS-induced after-effects (Ziemann et al., 2008. See also Müller-Dahlhaus and Vlachos, 2013 for a review). Vlachos et al. (2012) reported functional and structural changes of CA1 pyramidal neurons of entorhino-hippocampal slice cultures following repetitive magnetic stimulation. Research in rodent models provides relevant insights in the molecular mechanisms associated with rTMS. Wang et al. (2011) have documented an increment of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) binding affinity with NMDA receptors in the rat prefrontal cortex (PFC) in response to 5 days of rTMS. Importantly, BDNF plays a key role in the regulation of synaptic strength and mediation of neural plasticity (Bramham and Messaoudi, 2005).

The main goal of this article is to provide a state-of-the-art review on the therapeutic benefits of non-invasive brain stimulation in anxiety disorders. According to recent suggestions (e.g., Månsson et al., 2016), one important pathological mechanism in anxiety disorders is maladaptive structural and functional neuroplasticity of prefrontal and limbic regions. It is suggested that anxiety is associated with a hypoactivation of the left DLPFC (e.g., Amit Etkin and Wager, 2007; Nishimura et al., 2007), which inhibits the amygdala, a neural structure involved in threat detection and processing, which is elevated across most anxiety disorders (Notzon et al., 2015). On the other hand, there is evidence for higher activation of the right DLPFC in Aanxiety disorders, such as panic disorder (Nordahl et al., 1998; Prasko et al., 2004). These atypical functional activation patterns might be also associated with respective structural abnormalities of these neural regions, which might contribute to the emergence and chronicity of cognitive/emotional deficits (i.e., exaggerated fear response/threat perception). For instance, it was provided evidence of amygdalar and volume alterations in social anxiety, possibly associated with symptom severity (Machado-de-Sousa et al., 2014). In line with these premises, non-invasive brain stimulation might be a helpful treatment approach, via counteracting respective dysregulated activity and maladaptive neuroplasticity by modulating pathological hypo-/hyper-activation patterns of the DLPFC in respective clinical populations, as described above. In the discussion section of this review, we also outline a treatment model for anxiety disorders via non-invasive brain stimulation, which is conceptually based on up-/downregulation mechanisms and might serve as guide for future systematic investigations in the field.

This review will help to clarify i) whether and to what extent non-invasive brain stimulation is an effective treatment of different anxiety disorders, and ii) which combination in terms of stimulation type (i.e., inhibitory vs. excitatory) and cortical target is suited for the therapy of anxiety disorders. Moreover, it will provide information about relevant stimulation parameters as a starting point for systematic optimization, as well as generate hypotheses how non-invasive brain stimulation might be combined with other interventions to obtain improved therapeutic benefits.

Section snippets

Methods

Data for this systematic review were collected in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Moher et al., 2010). The PRISMA consists of a checklist intended to facilitate preparation and reporting review/meta-analysis studies by identifying, selecting, and critically appraising relevant research, and collecting and analyzing data from the studies that are included in the review.

Anxiety disorders

In the next paragraphs, we address the therapeutic effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on anxiety disorders. According to the DSM-5 (Association, A.P., 2014), anxiety disorders include separation anxiety disorder, selective mutism, specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia and generalized anxiety disorder. We did not consider separation anxiety disorder and selective mutism, as these are specific childhood syndromes.

Discussion

We systematically reviewed 27 published reports of studies in which non-invasive brain stimulation was administered to test effects on anxiety symptoms in patients affected by different anxiety disorders. Overall, the studies examined in this review support the concept that non-invasive brain stimulation represents a promising therapeutic approach for the treatment of anxiety disorders.

In most studies, an improvement of anxiety symptoms was associated with stimulation of the PFC, which

Declaration of interests

This work was supported by grants from the (i) Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Germany; ii) The SFB 1280 – Extinction learning; iii) The BMBF GCBS project (grant 01EE1403C). All authors declare no competing interests.

References (129)

  • E.K. Diekhof et al.

    Fear is only as deep as the mind allows: a coordinate-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on the regulation of negative affect

    NeuroImage

    (2011)
  • D. Dilkov et al.

    Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the right dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a randomized, double-blind sham controlled clinical trial

    Progr. Neuro-Psychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry

    (2017)
  • G.H. Eifert et al.

    The cardiac anxiety questionnaire: development and preliminary validity

    Behav. Res. Ther.

    (2000)
  • J. Feil et al.

    Brain stimulation in the study and treatment of addiction

    Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev.

    (2010)
  • A. Flöel

    tDCS-enhanced motor and cognitive function in neurological diseases

    NeuroImage

    (2014)
  • M.H. Freeston et al.

    Why do people worry?

    Pers. Indiv. Diff.

    (1994)
  • B. Fritsch et al.

    Direct current stimulation promotes BDNF-dependent synaptic plasticity: potential implications for motor learning

    Neuron

    (2010)
  • J. Haidt et al.

    Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: a scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors

    Pers. Indiv. Diff.

    (1994)
  • M.J. Herrmann et al.

    Medial prefrontal cortex stimulation accelerates therapy response of exposure therapy in acrophobia

    Brain Stim.

    (2017)
  • R.B. Hidalgo et al.

    Generalized anxiety disorder: an important clinical concern

    Med. Clin. North Am.

    (2001)
  • R.B. Hidalgo et al.

    Chapter 19 - generalized anxiety disorder

  • Y.-Z. Huang et al.

    Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex

    Neuron

    (2005)
  • Z. Huang et al.

    Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the right parietal cortex for comorbid generalized anxiety disorder and insomnia: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled pilot study

    Brain Stim.

    (2018)
  • D. Keeser et al.

    Prefrontal direct current stimulation modulates resting EEG and event-related potentials in healthy subjects: a standardized low resolution tomography (sLORETA) study

    NeuroImage

    (2011)
  • W. Klomjai et al.

    Basic principles of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and repetitive TMS (rTMS)

    Ann. Phys. Rehabil. Med.

    (2015)
  • W. Klomjai et al.

    Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation in motor rehabilitation after stroke: an update

    Ann. Phys. Rehabil. Med.

    (2015)
  • G. Kronberg et al.

    Direct current stimulation modulates LTP and LTD: activity dependence and dendritic effects

    Brain Stim.

    (2017)
  • M.-F. Kuo et al.

    Therapeutic effects of non-invasive brain stimulation with direct currents (tDCS) in neuropsychiatric diseases

    NeuroImage

    (2014)
  • F. Li et al.

    The cognitive up- and down-regulation of positive emotion: evidence from behavior, electrophysiology, and neuroimaging

    Biol. Psychol.

    (2018)
  • W. Liu et al.

    Affective processing in Non-invasive brain stimulation Over prefrontal cortex

    Front. Human Neurosci.

    (2017)
  • A. Mantovani et al.

    Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of panic disorder (PD) with comorbid major depression

    J. Affect. Dis.

    (2007)
  • A. Mantovani et al.

    Randomized sham controlled trial of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for the treatment of panic disorder with comorbid major depression

    J. Affect. Dis.

    (2013)
  • T.J. Meyer et al.

    Development and validation of the penn state worry questionnaire

    Behav. Res. Ther.

    (1990)
  • D. Moher et al.

    Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

    Intern. J. Surg.

    (2010)
  • K. Monte-Silva et al.

    Induction of late LTP-like plasticity in the human motor cortex by repeated Non-invasive brain stimulation

    Brain Stim.

    (2013)
  • J. Mutz et al.

    Efficacy and acceptability of non-invasive brain stimulation for the treatment of adult unipolar and bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised sham-controlled trials

    Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev.

    (2018)
  • Y. Nishimura et al.

    Frontal dysfunction during a cognitive task in drug-naive patients with panic disorder as investigated by multi-channel near-infrared spectroscopy imaging

    Neurosci. Res.

    (2007)
  • M.A. Nitsche et al.

    Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008

    Brain Stim.

    (2008)
  • T.E. Nordahl et al.

    Regional cerebral metabolic asymmetries replicated in an independent group of patients with panic disorder

    Biol. Psychiatry

    (1998)
  • S. Notzon et al.

    Psychophysiological effects of an iTBS modulated virtual reality challenge including participants with spider phobia

    Biol. Psychology

    (2015)
  • B.O. Olatunji et al.

    Development and initial validation of an abbreviated spider phobia questionnaire using item response theory

    Behav. Ther.

    (2009)
  • G.S. Pell et al.

    Modulation of cortical excitability induced by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: influence of timing and geometrical parameters and underlying mechanisms

    Prog. Neurobiol.

    (2011)
  • L. Pergamin-Hight et al.

    Content specificity of attention bias to threat in anxiety disorders: a meta-analysis

    Clin. Psychol. Rev.

    (2015)
  • S. Reiss et al.

    Anxiety sensitivity, anxiety frequency and the prediction of fearfulness

    Behav. Res. Ther.

    (1986)
  • M. Assaf et al.

    Neural functional architecture and modulation during decision making under uncertainty in individuals with generalized anxiety disorder

    Brain Behav.

    (2018)
  • Association, A.P

    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

    (2014)
  • B. Bandelow

    Panic and Agoraphobia Scale (PAS)

    (1999)
  • S.J. Banks et al.

    Amygdala–frontal connectivity during emotion regulation

    Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci.

    (2007)
  • G. Batsikadze et al.

    Effect of serotonin on paired associative stimulation-induced plasticity in the human motor cortex

    Neuropsychopharmacology

    (2013)
  • A. Beck et al.

    With Greenberg, RL (1985). Anxiety Disorders and Phobias: A Cognitive Perspective

    (1985)
  • Cited by (119)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text