While current treatments for substance use disorder (SUD) are beneficial, success rates remain low and treatment outcomes are complicated by co-occurring SUDs, many of which are without available medication treatments. Research involving neuromodulation for SUD has recently gained momentum. This study evaluated two doses (60 and 90 W) of Low Intensity Focused Ultrasound (LIFU), targeting the bilateral nucleus accumbens (NAc), in individuals with SUD.
Four participants (three male), who were receiving comprehensive outpatient treatment for opioid use disorder at the time of enrollment and who also had a history of excessive non-opioid substance use, completed this pilot study. After confirming eligibility, these participants received 10 min sham LIFU followed by 20 min active LIFU (10 min to left then right NAc). Outcomes were the safety, tolerability, and feasibility during the LIFU procedure and throughout the 90-day follow-up. Outcomes also included the impact of LIFU on cue-induced substance craving, assessed via Visual Analog Scale (VAS), both acutely (pre-, during and post-procedure) and during the 90-day follow-up. Daily craving ratings (without cues) were also obtained for one-week prior to and one-week following LIFU.
Both LIFU doses were safe and well-tolerated based on reported adverse events and MRI scans revealed no structural changes (0 min, 24 h, and 1-week post-procedure). For the two participants receiving “enhanced” (90 W) LIFU, VAS craving ratings revealed active LIFU attenuated craving for participants’ primary substances of choice relative to sham sonication. For these participants, reductions were also noted in daily VAS craving ratings (0 = no craving; 10 = most craving ever) across the week following LIFU relative to pre-LIFU; Participant #3 pre- vs. post-LIFU: opioids (3.6 ± 0.6 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4), heroin (4.2 ± 0.8 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4), methamphetamine (3.2 ± 0.4 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0), cocaine (2.4 ± 0.6 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0), benzodiazepines (2.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0), alcohol (6.0 ± 0.7 vs. 2.7 ± 0.8), and nicotine (5.6 ± 1.5 vs. 3.1 ± 0.7); Participant #4: alcohol (3.5 ± 1.3 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0) and nicotine (5.0 ± 1.8 vs. 1.2 ± 0.8) (all
In conclusion, LIFU targeting the NAc was safe and acutely reduced substance craving during the LIFU procedure, and potentially had longer-term impact on craving reductions. While early observations are promising, NAc LIFU requires further investigation in a controlled trial to assess the impact on substance craving and ultimately substance use and relapse.