Task-Dependent Modulation of Inputs to Proximal Upper Limb Following Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Primary Motor Cortex

2010 ◽  
Vol 103 (5) ◽  
pp. 2382-2389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynley V. Bradnam ◽  
Cathy M. Stinear ◽  
Gwyn N. Lewis ◽  
Winston D. Byblow
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Silent Period ◽  
Hand Muscles ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Contralateral Hand ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
Period Duration

Cathodal transcranial DC stimulation (c-tDCS) suppresses excitability of primary motor cortex (M1) controlling contralateral hand muscles. This study assessed whether c-tDCS would have similar effects on ipsi- and contralateral M1 projections to a proximal upper limb muscle. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of left M1 was used to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in the left and right infraspinatus (INF) muscle immediately before and after c-tDCS of left M1, and at 20 and 40 min, post-c-tDCS. TMS was delivered as participants preactivated each INF in isolation (left, right) or both INF together (bilateral). After c-tDCS, ipsilateral MEPs in left INF and contralateral MEPs in right INF were suppressed in the left task but not in the bilateral or right tasks, indicative of task-dependent modulation. Ipsilateral silent period duration in the left INF was reduced after c-tDCS, indicative of altered transcallosal inhibition. These findings may have implications for the use of tDCS as an adjunct to therapy for the proximal upper limb after stroke.

Cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation suppresses ipsilateral projections to presumed propriospinal neurons of the proximal upper limb

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 2582-2589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynley V. Bradnam ◽  
Cathy M. Stinear ◽  
Winston D. Byblow
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Silent Period ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Healthy Humans ◽  
Median Nerve Stimulation

This study investigated whether cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) of left primary motor cortex (M1) modulates excitability of ipsilateral propriospinal premotoneurons (PNs) in healthy humans. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the right motor cortex was used to obtain motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from the left biceps brachii (BB) while participants maintained contraction of the left BB. To examine presumed PN excitability, left BB MEPs were compared with those conditioned by median nerve stimulation (MNS) at the left elbow. Interstimulus intervals between TMS and MNS were set to produce summation at the C3–C4 level of the spinal cord. MNS facilitated BB MEPs elicited at TMS intensities near active motor threshold but inhibited BB MEPs at slightly higher intensities, indicative of putative PN modulation. c-tDCS suppressed the facilitatory and inhibitory effects of MNS. Sham tDCS did not alter either component. There was no effect of c-tDCS and sham tDCS on nonconditioned left BB MEPs or on the ipsilateral silent period of left BB. Right first dorsal interosseous MEPs were suppressed by c-tDCS. These results indicate that M1 c-tDCS can be used to modulate excitability of ipsilateral projections to presumed PNs controlling the proximal arm muscle BB. This technique may hold promise for promoting motor recovery of proximal upper limb function after stroke.

scholarly journals Transcranial direct current stimulation treatment protocols: should stimulus intensity be constant or incremental over multiple sessions?

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Verònica Gálvez ◽  
Angelo Alonzo ◽  
Donel Martin ◽  
Colleen K. Loo
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Cortical Excitability ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Constant Intensity ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Before And After

Abstract Interest in transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as a new tool in neuropsychiatry has led to the need to establish optimal treatment protocols. In an intra-individual randomized cross-over design, 11 healthy volunteers received five tDCS sessions to the left primary motor cortex on consecutive weekdays at a constant or gradually increasing current intensity, in two separate weeks of testing. Cortical excitability was assessed before and after tDCS at each session through peripheral electromyographic recordings of motor-evoked potentials. Both conditions led to significant cumulative increases in cortical excitability across the week but there were no significant differences between the two groups. Motor thresholds decreased significantly from Monday to Friday in both conditions. This study demonstrated that, in the motor cortex, administration of tDCS five times per week whether at a constant intensity or at a gradually increasing intensity was equally effective in increasing cortical excitability.

scholarly journals Associative plasticity in the human motor cortex is enhanced by concurrently targeting separate muscle representations with excitatory and inhibitory protocols

2016 ◽  
Vol 115 (4) ◽  
pp. 2191-2198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc R. Kamke ◽  
Abbey S. Nydam ◽  
Martin V. Sale ◽  
Jason B. Mattingley
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Control Experiment ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Spillover Effects ◽  
Abductor Pollicis Brevis ◽  
Human Motor Cortex ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Abductor Digiti Minimi ◽  
Intrinsic Hand Muscle

Paired associative stimulation (PAS) induces changes in the excitability of human sensorimotor cortex that outlast the procedure. PAS typically involves repeatedly pairing stimulation of a peripheral nerve that innervates an intrinsic hand muscle with transcranial magnetic stimulation over the representation of that muscle in the primary motor cortex. Depending on the timing of the stimuli (interstimulus interval of 25 or 10 ms), PAS leads to either an increase (PAS25) or a decrease (PAS10) in excitability. Both protocols, however, have been associated with an increase in excitability of nearby muscle representations not specifically targeted by PAS. Based on these spillover effects, we hypothesized that an additive, excitability-enhancing effect of PAS25 applied to one muscle representation may be produced by simultaneously applying PAS25 or PAS10 to a nearby representation. In different experiments prototypical PAS25 targeting the left thumb representation [abductor pollicis brevis (APB)] was combined with either PAS25 or PAS10 applied to the left little finger representation [abductor digiti minimi (ADM)] or, in a control experiment, with PAS10 also targeting the APB. In an additional control experiment PAS10 targeted both representations. The plasticity effects were quantified by measuring the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) recorded before and after PAS. As expected, prototypical PAS25 was associated with an increase in MEP amplitude in the APB muscle. This effect was enhanced when PAS also targeted the ADM representation but only when a different interstimulus timing (PAS10) was used. These results suggest that PAS-induced plasticity is modified by concurrently targeting separate motor cortical representations with excitatory and inhibitory protocols.

scholarly journals Changes in corticospinal excitability associated with motor learning by observing

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather R. McGregor ◽  
Michael Vesia ◽  
Cricia Rinchon ◽  
Robert Chen ◽  
Paul L. Gribble
Keyword(s):  
Motor Learning ◽  
Motor Skills ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Single Pulse ◽  
Abductor Pollicis Brevis ◽  
Functional Changes ◽  
Hand Muscles ◽  
Before And After

AbstractWhile many of our motor skills are acquired through physical practice, we can also learn how to make movements by observing others. For example, individuals can learn how to reach in novel dynamical environments (‘force fields’, FF) by observing the movements of a tutor. Previous neurophysiology and neuroimaging studies in humans suggest a role for the motor system in motor learning by observing. Here we tested the role of primary motor cortex (M1) in motor learning by observing. We used single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in right hand muscles at rest. MEPs were elicited before and after participants observed either a video adapting her reaches to a FF or a control video showing a tutor performing reaches in an unlearnable FF. We predicted that observing motor learning would increase M1 excitability to a greater extent than observing movements that did not involve learning. We found that observing FF learning increased MEP amplitudes recorded from right first dorsal interosseous (FDI) and right abductor pollicis brevis (APB) muscles. There were no changes in MEP amplitudes for control participants who observed a tutor performing reaches in an unlearnable, randomly varying FF. The observed MEP changes can thus be specifically linked to observing motor learning. These results are consistent with the idea that observing motor learning produces functional changes in M1, or corticospinal networks or both.

scholarly journals Influence of iTBS on the Acute Neuroplastic Change After BCI Training

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Ding ◽  
Tuo Lin ◽  
Manfeng Wu ◽  
Wenqing Yang ◽  
Wanqi Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Functional Connectivity ◽  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Silent Period ◽  
Single Pulse ◽  
Functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: Brain-computer interface (BCI) training is becoming increasingly popular in neurorehabilitation. However, around one third subjects have difficulties in controlling BCI devices effectively, which limits the application of BCI training. Furthermore, the effectiveness of BCI training is not satisfactory in stroke rehabilitation. Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is a powerful neural modulatory approach with strong facilitatory effects. Here, we investigated whether iTBS would improve BCI accuracy and boost the neuroplastic changes induced by BCI training.Methods: Eight right-handed healthy subjects (four males, age: 20–24) participated in this two-session study (BCI-only session and iTBS+BCI session in random order). Neuroplastic changes were measured by functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). In BCI-only session, fNIRS was measured at baseline and immediately after BCI training. In iTBS+BCI session, BCI training was followed by iTBS delivered on the right primary motor cortex (M1). Single-pulse TMS was measured at baseline and immediately after iTBS. fNIRS was measured at baseline, immediately after iTBS, and immediately after BCI training. Paired-sample t-tests were used to compare amplitudes of motor-evoked potentials, cortical silent period duration, oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO2) concentration and functional connectivity across time points, and BCI accuracy between sessions.Results: No significant difference in BCI accuracy was detected between sessions (p > 0.05). In BCI-only session, functional connectivity matrices between motor cortex and prefrontal cortex were significantly increased after BCI training (p's < 0.05). In iTBS+BCI session, amplitudes of motor-evoked potentials were significantly increased after iTBS (p's < 0.05), but no change in HbO2 concentration or functional connectivity was observed throughout the whole session (p's > 0.05).Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study that investigated how iTBS targeted on M1 influences BCI accuracy and the acute neuroplastic changes after BCI training. Our results revealed that iTBS targeted on M1 did not influence BCI accuracy or facilitate the neuroplastic changes after BCI training. Therefore, M1 might not be an effective stimulation target of iTBS for the purpose of improving BCI accuracy or facilitate its effectiveness; other brain regions (i.e., prefrontal cortex) are needed to be further investigated as potentially effective stimulation targets.

scholarly journals Cerebellar rTMS and PAS effectively induce cerebellar plasticity

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martje G. Pauly ◽  
Annika Steinmeier ◽  
Christina Bolte ◽  
Feline Hamami ◽  
Elinor Tzvi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Cortical Excitability ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Premotor Cortex ◽  
Motor Pathways ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Cerebellar Plasticity

AbstractNon-invasive brain stimulation techniques including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS), paired associative stimulation (PAS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been applied over the cerebellum to induce plasticity and gain insights into the interaction of the cerebellum with neo-cortical structures including the motor cortex. We compared the effects of 1 Hz rTMS, cTBS, PAS and tDCS given over the cerebellum on motor cortical excitability and interactions between the cerebellum and dorsal premotor cortex / primary motor cortex in two within subject designs in healthy controls. In experiment 1, rTMS, cTBS, PAS, and tDCS were applied over the cerebellum in 20 healthy subjects. In experiment 2, rTMS and PAS were compared to sham conditions in another group of 20 healthy subjects. In experiment 1, PAS reduced cortical excitability determined by motor evoked potentials (MEP) amplitudes, whereas rTMS increased motor thresholds and facilitated dorsal premotor-motor and cerebellum-motor cortex interactions. TDCS and cTBS had no significant effects. In experiment 2, MEP amplitudes increased after rTMS and motor thresholds following PAS. Analysis of all participants who received rTMS and PAS showed that MEP amplitudes were reduced after PAS and increased following rTMS. rTMS also caused facilitation of dorsal premotor-motor cortex and cerebellum-motor cortex interactions. In summary, cerebellar 1 Hz rTMS and PAS can effectively induce plasticity in cerebello-(premotor)-motor pathways provided larger samples are studied.

scholarly journals Effect of opposing needling on motor cortex excitability in healthy participants and in patients with post-stroke hemiplegia: study protocol for a single-blind, randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mindong Xu ◽  
Yinyu Zi ◽  
Jianlu Wu ◽  
Nenggui Xu ◽  
Liming Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Motor Cortex Excitability ◽  
Opposing Needling ◽  
Single Blind ◽  
Healthy Participants

Abstract Background Opposing needling has an obvious curative effect in the treatment of post-stroke hemiplegia; however, the mechanism of the opposing needling in the treatment of post-stroke hemiplegia is still not clear. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of opposing needling on the excitability of primary motor cortex (M1) of healthy participants and patients with post-stroke hemiplegia, which may provide insight into the mechanisms of opposing needling in treating post-stroke hemiplegia. Methods This will be a single-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial in which 80 healthy participants and 40 patients with post-stroke hemiplegia will be recruited. Healthy participants will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to the 2-Hz, 50-Hz, 100-Hz, and sham electroacupuncture groups. Patients with post-stroke hemiplegia will be randomised 1:1 to the opposing needling or conventional treatment groups. The M1 will be located in all groups by using neuroimaging-based navigation. The stimulator coil of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) will be moved over the left and right M1 in order to identify the TMS hotspot, followed by a recording of resting motor thresholds (RMTs) and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) of the thenar muscles induced by TMS before and after the intervention. The primary outcome measure will be the percent change in the RMTs of the thenar muscles at baseline and after the intervention. The secondary outcome measures will be the amplitude (μV) and latency (ms) of the MEPs of the thenar muscles at baseline and after the intervention. Discussion The aim of this trial is to explore the effect of opposing needling on the excitability of M1 of healthy participants and patients with post-stroke hemiplegia. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1900028138. Registered on 13 December 2019.

scholarly journals Online and offline effects of transcranial alternating current stimulation of the primary motor cortex

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Pozdniakov ◽  
Alicia Nunez Vorobiova ◽  
Giulia Galli ◽  
Simone Rossi ◽  
Matteo Feurra
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Cortical Excitability ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Random Noise ◽  
Single Pulse ◽  
Alternating Current ◽  
Online Application ◽  
Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation ◽  
Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation

AbstractTranscranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that allows interaction with endogenous cortical oscillatory rhythms by means of external sinusoidal potentials. The physiological mechanisms underlying tACS effects are still under debate. Whereas online (e.g., ongoing) tACS over the motor cortex induces robust state-, phase- and frequency-dependent effects on cortical excitability, the offline effects (i.e. after-effects) of tACS are less clear. Here, we explored online and offline effects of tACS in two single-blind, sham-controlled experiments. In both experiments we used neuronavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) as a probe to index changes of cortical excitability and delivered M1 tACS at 10 Hz (alpha), 20 Hz (beta) and sham (30 s of low-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation; tRNS). Corticospinal excitability was measured by single pulse TMS-induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). tACS was delivered online in Experiment 1 and offline in Experiment 2. In Experiment 1, the increase of MEPs size was maximal with the 20 Hz stimulation, however in Experiment 2 neither the 10 Hz nor the 20 Hz stimulation induced tACS offline effects. These findings support the idea that tACS affects cortical excitability only during online application, at least when delivered on the scalp overlying M1, thereby contributing to the development of effective protocols that can be applied to clinical populations.

Intracortical Inhibition During Volitional Inhibition of Prepared Action

2006 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 3371-3383 ◽  
Author(s):  
James P. Coxon ◽  
Cathy M. Stinear ◽  
Winston D. Byblow
Keyword(s):  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Short Interval ◽  
Intracortical Inhibition ◽  
Corticomotor Excitability ◽  
Hand Muscles ◽  
Cortical Level ◽  
A Site ◽  
Intrinsic Hand Muscles ◽  
Inhibitory Networks

Volitional inhibition is the voluntary prevention of a prepared movement. Here we ask whether primary motor cortex (M1) is a site of convergence of cortical activity associated with movement preparation and volitional inhibition. Volitional inhibition was studied by presenting a stop signal before execution of an anticipated response that requires a key lift to intercept a revolving dial. Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were elicited in intrinsic hand muscles by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to assess corticomotor excitability and short interval intracortical inhibition (sICI) during task performance. The closer the stop cue was presented to the anticipated response, the harder it was for subjects to inhibit their response. Corticomotor pathway excitability was temporally modulated during volitional inhibition. Using subthreshold TMS, corticomotor excitability was reduced for Stop trials relative to Go trials from 140 ms after the cue. sICI was significantly greater for Stop trials compared with Go trials at a time that preceded the onset of muscle activity associated with the anticipated response. These results provide evidence that volitional inhibition is exerted at a cortical level and that inhibitory networks within M1 contribute to volitional inhibition of prepared action.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document