Beneficial effect of plasmapheresis but not on IVIG in Bickerstaff’s brainstem encephalitis

By B. Nguyen-Huu, Frank Birklein, S. Haegele-Link, Peter Stoeter, Marianne Dieterich, P. P. Urban. 2006

706 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Neurology, Ophthalmology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a7bf918e02d263fe77ae51c718ae4f386f87f3e2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

In Neurology

Citations in the corpus

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory in patients with Parkinson's disease (2006, background): “Transcranial DC stimulation induces a polarity-dependent excitability shift of the stimulated areas, which is initially induced by a subthreshold membrane potential shift, followed by prolonged after-effects that depend on modification of the strength of NMDA receptors [14].”
Partially non‐linear stimulation intensity‐dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans (2013, methodology): “Both 2 mA cathodal and anodal, as well as 1 mA cathodal tDCS did not change motor thresholds, just as after application of 1 mA tDCS in a former study (Nitsche et al. 2005), which was explained by major tDCS effects on cortical neurons, while MTs depend primarily on corticospinal neurons.”
Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008 (2008, background): “For tDCS durations that produce short-lasting (namely, for about 10 minutes) after-effects, a 1-hour break between stimulation sessions is sufficient.(42) For tDCS durations resulting in long-lasting after-effects (1 hour or more), an intersession interval of 48 hours to 1 week has been suggested.”
Shaping the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of the human motor cortex. (2007, neutral): “This intersession break duration was chosen because it was shown to cause no interference between the respective tDCS sessions, as reported in a former study (Nitsche et al. 2005).”
tDCS-enhanced motor and cognitive function in neurological diseases (2014, neutral): “…of 1 mA) and sham tDCS elicit comparably minimal discomfort and duration of sensations in the absence of differences in attention or fatigue, and can thus not be distinguished from sham by study participants nor investigators (Gandiga et al., 2006; Iyer et al., 2005; Nitsche et al., 2005).”
A technical guide to tDCS, and related non-invasive brain stimulation tools (2015, background): “In multiple session approaches, for short-term plasticity effects (5 or 7 min stimulation) an intersession interval of one hour is sufficient (Nitsche et al., 2005; Fricke et al., 2011).”
Transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS): a tool for double-blind sham-controlled clinical studies in brain stimulation. (2006, methodology): “Saline-soaked electrodes (5 cm!5 cm) were placed on the scalp overlying the motor cortex and on the contralateral forehead above the orbit as described previously (Hummel et al., 2005a; Nitsche and Paulus, 2000; Nitsche et al., 2005).”
Clinical Research with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS): Challenges and Future Directions (2011, neutral): “TDCS also interferes with brain excitability through modulation of intracortical and corticospinal neurons.(10,39) The effects of tDCS might be similar to those observed in long-term potentiation (LTP), as shown by one recent animal study that applied anodal motor cortex stimulation and showed a las”
A sham‐controlled, phase II trial of transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of central pain in traumatic spinal cord injury (2006, background): “…a change in the electrical properties of the neuronal membrane that can result in a hyperpolarization or depolarization of the stimulated area (Nitsche et al., 2005); while repetitive stimulation induced by rTMS induces a change in the synaptic strengthening efficacy through mechanisms of…”