Effects of paired pulse TMS of primary somatosensory cortex on perception of a peripheral electrical stimulus

3D-printed helmet-type neuro-navigation approach (I-Helmet) for transcranial magnetic stimulation

Neuro-navigation is a key technology to ensure the clinical efficacy of TMS. However, the neuro-navigation system based on positioning sensor is currently unable to be promoted and applied in clinical practice due to its time-consuming and high-cost. In the present study, we designed I-Helmet system to promote an individualized and clinically friendly neuro-navigation approach to TMS clinical application. I-Helmet system is based on C++ with a graphical user interface that allows users to design a 3D-printed helmet model for coil navigation. Besides, a dedicated coil positioning accuracy detection method was promoted based on three-dimensional (3D) printing and 3D laser scanning for evaluation. T1 images were collected from 24 subjects, and based on each image, phantom were created to simulate skin and hair. Six 3D-printed helmets with the head positioning hole enlarged by 0-5% tolerance in 1% increments were designed to evaluate the influences of skin, hair, and helmet-tolerance on the positioning accuracy and contact force of I-Helmet. Finally, I-Helmet system was evaluated by comparing its positioning accuracy with three skin hardnesses, three hair styles, three operators, and with or without landmarks. The accuracy of the proposed coil positioning accuracy detection method was about 0.30 mm in position and 0.22° in orientation. Skin and hair had significant influences on positioning accuracy (p < 0.0001), whereas different skin hardnesses, hair styles, and operators did not (p > 0.05). The tolerance of the helmet presented significant influences on positioning accuracy (p < 0.0001) and contact force (p < 0.0001). The positioning accuracy significantly increased (p < 0.0001) with landmark guided I-Helmet. 3D-printed helmet-type Neuro-navigation approach (I-Helmet) with 3% tolerance and landmarks met the positioning requirements for TMS in clinical practice with less than 5 N mean contact force, 3-5 mm positioning accuracy, 65.7 s mean operation time, and 50-yuan material cost. All the results suggest that the cost of I-Helmet system may be much less than the that of training clinical doctors to position the coil of TMS operation during short period of time.

Modulation of somatosensation by transcranial magnetic stimulation over somatosensory cortex: a systematic review

Over the last three decades, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has gained popularity as a tool to modulate human somatosensation. However, the effects of different stimulation types on the multiple distinct subdomains of somatosensation (e.g., tactile perception, proprioception and pain) have not been systematically compared. This is especially notable in the case of newer theta-burst stimulation protocols now in widespread use. Here, we aimed to systematically and critically review the existing TMS literature and provide a complete picture of current knowledge regarding the role of TMS in modulating human somatosensation across stimulation protocols and somatosensory domains. Following the PRISMA guidelines, fifty-four studies were included in the current review and were compared based on their methodologies and results. Overall, findings from these studies provide evidence that different types of somatosensation can be both disrupted and enhanced by targeted stimulation of specific somatosensory areas. Some mixed results, however, were reported in the literature. We discussed possible reasons for these mixed results, methodological limitations of existing investigations, and potential avenues for future research.

A Short Route for Reach Planning between Human V6A and the Motor Cortex

In the macaque monkey, area V6A, located in the medial posterior parietal cortex, contains cells that encode the spatial position of a reaching target. It has been suggested that during reach planning this information is sent to the frontal cortex along a parieto-frontal pathway that connects V6A-premotor cortex-M1. A similar parieto-frontal network may also exist in the human brain, and we aimed here to study the timing of this functional connection during planning of a reaching movement toward different spatial positions. We probed the functional connectivity between human area V6A (hV6A) and the primary motor cortex (M1) using dual-site, paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation with a short (4 ms) and a longer (10 ms) interstimulus interval while healthy participants (18 men and 18 women) planned a visually-guided or a memory-guided reaching movement toward positions located at different depths and directions. We found that, when the stimulation over hV6A is sent 4 ms before the stimulation over M1, hV6A inhibits motor-evoked potentials during planning of either rightward or leftward reaching movements. No modulations were found when the stimulation over hV6A was sent 10 ms before the stimulation over M1, suggesting that only short medial parieto-frontal routes are active during reach planning. Moreover, the short route of hV6A-premotor cortex-M1 is active during reach planning irrespectively of the nature (visual or memory) of the reaching target. These results agree with previous neuroimaging studies and provide the first demonstration of the flow of inhibitory signals between hV6A and M1.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT All our dexterous movements depend on the correct functioning of the network of brain areas. Knowing the functional timing of these networks is useful to gain a deeper understanding of how the brain works to enable accurate arm movements. In this article, we probed the parieto-frontal network and demonstrated that it takes 4 ms for the medial posterior parietal cortex to send inhibitory signals to the frontal cortex during reach planning. This fast flow of information seems not to be dependent on the availability of visual information regarding the reaching target. This study opens the way for future studies to test how this timing could be impaired in different neurological disorders.

Sensory and motor cortical excitability changes induced by rTMS and sensory stimulation in stroke: A randomized clinical trial

Background

The ability to produce coordinated movement is dependent on dynamic interactions through transcallosal fibers between the two cerebral hemispheres of the brain. Although typically unilateral, stroke induces changes in functional and effective connectivity across hemispheres, which are related to sensorimotor impairment and stroke recovery. Previous studies have focused almost exclusively on interhemispheric interactions in the primary motor cortex (M1).

Objective

To identify the presence of interhemispheric asymmetry (ASY) of somatosensory cortex (S1) excitability and to investigate whether S1 repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with sensory stimulation (SS) changes excitability in S1 and M1, as well as S1 ASY, in individuals with subacute stroke.

Methods

A randomized clinical trial. Participants with a single episode of stroke, in the subacute phase, between 35 and 75 years old, were allocated, randomly and equally balanced, to four groups: rTMS/sham SS, sham rTMS/SS, rTMS/SS, and sham rTMS/Sham SS. Participants underwent 10 sessions of S1 rTMS of the lesioned hemisphere (10 Hz, 1,500 pulses) followed by SS. SS was applied to the paretic upper limb (UL) (active SS) or non-paretic UL (sham SS). TMS-induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs) of the paretic UL and somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) of both ULs assessed M1 and S1 cortical excitability, respectively. The S1 ASY index was measured before and after intervention. Evaluator, participants and the statistician were blinded.

Results

Thirty-six participants divided equally into groups (nine participants per group). Seven patients were excluded from MEP analysis because of failure to produce consistent MEP. One participant was excluded in the SSEP analysis because no SSEP was detected. All somatosensory stimulation groups had decreased S1 ASY except for the sham rTMS/Sham SS group. When compared with baseline, M1 excitability increased only in the rTMS/SS group.

Conclusion

S1 rTMS and SS alone or in combination changed S1 excitability and decreased ASY, but it was only their combination that increased M1 excitability.

Clinical trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov, identifier (NCT03329807).

Somatosensory Cortex Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Associative Sensory Stimulation of Peripheral Nerves Could Assist Motor and Sensory Recovery After Stroke

Background

We investigated whether transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the primary somatosensory cortex (S1) and sensory stimulation (SS) could promote upper limb recovery in participants with subacute stroke.

Methods

Participants were randomized into four groups: rTMS/Sham SS, Sham rTMS/SS, rTMS/SS, and control group (Sham rTMS/Sham SS). Participants underwent ten sessions of sham or active rTMS over S1 (10 Hz, 1,500 pulses, 120% of resting motor threshold, 20 min), followed by sham or active SS. The SS involved active sensory training (exploring features of objects and graphesthesia, proprioception exercises), mirror therapy, and Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in the region of the median nerve in the wrist (stimulation intensity as the minimum intensity at which the participants reported paresthesia; five electrical pulses of 1 ms duration each at 10 Hz were delivered every second over 45 min). Sham stimulations occurred as follows: Sham rTMS, coil was held while disconnected from the stimulator, and rTMS noise was presented with computer loudspeakers with recorded sound from a real stimulation. The Sham SS received therapy in the unaffected upper limb, did not use the mirror and received TENS stimulation for only 60 seconds. The primary outcome was the Body Structure/Function: Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Nottingham Sensory Assessment (NSA); the secondary outcome was the Activity/Participation domains, assessed with Box and Block Test, Motor Activity Log scale, Jebsen-Taylor Test, and Functional Independence Measure.

Results

Forty participants with stroke ischemic (n = 38) and hemorrhagic (n = 2), men (n = 19) and women (n = 21), in the subacute stage (10.6 ± 6 weeks) had a mean age of 62.2 ± 9.6 years, were equally divided into four groups (10 participants in each group). Significant somatosensory improvements were found in participants receiving active rTMS and active SS, compared with those in the control group (sham rTMS with sham SS). Motor function improved only in participants who received active rTMS, with greater effects when active rTMS was combined with active SS.

Conclusion

The combined use of SS with rTMS over S1 represents a more effective therapy for increasing sensory and motor recovery, as well as functional independence, in participants with subacute stroke.

Clinical Trial Registration

[clinicaltrials.gov], identifier [NCT03329807].

Supplementary motor area contributes to carrying previous movement information over to current movement

The purpose of the present study was to determine the cortical areas contributing to the influence of the previous movement on the current movement. Right-handed healthy human participants abducted and then adducted the left index finger in response to a start cue. Twenty consecutive trials with 10 s intertrial intervals were performed in each trial block. An odd-numbered trial was considered to be the previous trial, and a trial immediately after the previous trial (even-numbered trial) was the current trial. In each trial block, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was given over one of the seven TMS sites with the start cue in the previous trial. The TMS site was over the supplementary motor area (SMA), right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, right dorsal premotor cortex, right or left posterior parietal cortex or right primary sensory cortex. Sham TMS, producing magnetic stimulation with the coil tilting 90 degrees off the scalp, was delivered over the Cz. In the current trial, TMS was not delivered. The correlation coefficient of the reaction time between the previous and current trials was positive and significant in the sham TMS trial block. This indicates that the current movement is partially dependent on the previous movement. The correlation coefficient of the reaction time between the previous and current movements in the SMA trial block was significantly different from that in the sham TMS trial block, indicating that the SMA contributes to the influence of the previous movement on the current movement. The SMA contributes to carrying the responsiveness level in the previous movement over to the current movement.

Modulating Brain Networks With Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Over the Primary Motor Cortex: A Concurrent TMS/fMRI Study

Stimulating the primary motor cortex (M1) using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) causes unique multisensory experience such as the targeted muscle activity, afferent/reafferent sensory feedback, tactile sensation over the scalp and “click” sound. Although the human M1 has been intensively investigated using TMS, the experience of the M1 stimulation has not been elucidated at the whole brain. Here, using concurrent TMS/fMRI, we investigated the acute effect of the M1 stimulation of functional brain networks during task and at rest. A short train of 1 Hz TMS pulses applied to individuals’ hand area in the M1 during motor execution or at rest. Employing the independent component analysis (ICA), we showed the M1 stimulation decreased the motor networks activity when the networks were engaged in the task and increased the deactivation of networks when the networks were not involved in the ongoing task. The M1 stimulation induced the activation in the key networks involved in bodily self-consciousness (BSC) including the insular and rolandic operculum systems regardless of states. The degree of activation in these networks was prominent at rest compared to task conditions, showing the state-dependent TMS effect. Furthermore, we demonstrated that the M1 stimulation modulated other domain-general networks such as the default mode network (DMN) and attention network and the inter-network connectivity between these networks. Our results showed that the M1 stimulation induced the widespread changes in the brain at the targeted system as well as non-motor, remote brain networks, specifically related to the BSC. Our findings shed light on understanding the neural mechanism of the complex and multisensory experience of the M1 stimulation.

Locating primary somatosensory cortex in human brain stimulation studies: systematic review and meta-analytic evidence

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over human primary somatosensory cortex (S1), unlike over primary motor cortex (M1), does not produce an immediate, objective output. Researchers must therefore rely on one or more indirect methods to position the TMS coil over S1. The “gold standard” method of TMS coil positioning is to use individual functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging (f/sMRI) alongside a stereotactic navigation system. In the absence of these facilities, however, one common method used to locate S1 is to find the scalp location that produces twitches in a hand muscle (e.g., the first dorsal interosseus, M1-FDI) and then move the coil posteriorly to target S1. There has been no systematic assessment of whether this commonly reported method of finding the hand area of S1 is optimal. To do this, we systematically reviewed 124 TMS studies targeting the S1 hand area and 95 fMRI studies involving passive finger and hand stimulation. Ninety-six TMS studies reported the scalp location assumed to correspond to S1-hand, which was on average 1.5–2 cm posterior to the functionally defined M1-hand area. Using our own scalp measurements combined with similar data from MRI and TMS studies of M1-hand, we provide the estimated scalp locations targeted in these TMS studies of the S1-hand. We also provide a summary of reported S1 coordinates for passive finger and hand stimulation in fMRI studies. We conclude that S1-hand is more lateral to M1-hand than assumed by the majority of TMS studies.

Interhemispheric Inhibition Induced by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Over Primary Sensory Cortex

The present study investigated whether the long-interval interhemispheric inhibition (LIHI) is induced by the transcranial magnetic stimulation over the primary sensory area (S1-TMS) without activation of the conditioning side of the primary motor area (M1) contributing to the contralateral motor evoked potential (MEP), whether the S1-TMS-induced LIHI is dependent on the status of the S1 modulated by the tactile input, and whether the pathways mediating the LIHI are different from those mediating the M1-TMS-induced LIHI. In order to give the TMS over the S1 without eliciting the MEP, the intensity of the S1-TMS was adjusted to be the sub-motor-threshold level and the trials with the MEP response elicited by the S1-TMS were discarded online. The LIHI was induced by the S1-TMS given 40 ms before the test TMS in the participants with the attenuation of the tactile perception of the digit stimulation (TPDS) induced by the S1-TMS, indicating that the LIHI is induced by the S1-TMS without activation of the conditioning side of the M1 contributing to the contralateral MEP in the participants in which the pathways mediating the TPDS is sensitive to the S1-TMS. The S1-TMS-induced LIHI was positively correlated with the attenuation of the TPDS induced by the S1-TMS, indicating that the S1-TMS-induced LIHI is dependent on the effect of the S1-TMS on the pathways mediating the TPDS at the S1. In another experiment, the effect of the digit stimulation given before the conditioning TMS on the S1- or M1-TMS-induced LIHI was examined. The digit stimulation produces tactile input to the S1 causing change in the status of the S1. The S1-TMS-induced LIHI was enhanced when the S1-TMS was given in the period in which the tactile afferent volley produced by the digit stimulation just arrived at the S1, while the LIHI induced by above-motor-threshold TMS over the contralateral M1 was not enhanced by the tactile input. Thus, the S1-TMS-induced LIHI is dependent on the status of the S1 modulated by the tactile input, and the pathways mediating the sub-motor-threshold S1-TMS-induced LIHI are not the same as the pathways mediating the above-motor-threshold M1-TMS-induced LIHI.

Involvement of human primary somatosensory cortex in vibrotactile detection depends on task demand

Detecting and discriminating sensory stimuli are fundamental functions of the nervous system. Electrophysiological and lesion studies suggest that macaque primary somatosensory cortex (SI) is critically involved in discriminating between stimuli, but is not required simply for detecting stimuli. By contrast, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies in humans have shown near-complete disruption of somatosensory detection when a single pulse of TMS is delivered over SI. To address this discrepancy, we measured the sensitivity and decision criteria of participants detecting vibrotactile stimuli with individually-tailored fMRI-guided TMS over SI, over a control site not activated by vibrotactile stimuli (inferior parietal lobule, IPL), or away from the head (a no TMS condition). In a one-interval detection task, TMS increased participants' likelihood of reporting 'no' target present regardless of site, but TMS over SI also decreased detection sensitivity, and prevented improvement in tactile sensitivity over time. We then measured tactile thresholds in a series of two-interval forced-choice (2IFC) detection and discrimination tasks with lower dependence on response criteria and short-term memory load. We found that thresholds for detecting stimuli were comparable with TMS over SI and IPL, but TMS over SI specifically and significantly impaired frequency discrimination. We conclude that, in accordance with macaque studies, human SI is required for discriminating between tactile stimuli and for maintaining stimulus representations over time, or under high task demand, but may not be required for simple tactile detection.

SIGNIFICANT STATEMENT

Studies on monkeys have suggested that the primary somatosensory cortex is responsible for discriminating between different vibrations on the fingertips, but not just for detecting these vibrations. However, similar studies in humans suggest that the somatosensory cortex is required both for detecting and discriminating between tactile stimuli. We used magnetic brain stimulation to interfere with human somatosensory cortex while healthy volunteers detected and discriminated between vibrations applied to their fingertips. We found that the somatosensory cortex is required for keeping vibrotactile stimuli in memory for short periods of time and for comparing two vibrotactile stimuli, but is not required merely for detecting vibrotactile stimulation. This suggests that human primary somatosensory cortex is not always needed for vibrotactile detection.

Modulation of Cortical Inhibitory Circuits after Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation over the Primary Motor Cortex

Here, we aimed to evaluate whether cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) and primary somatosensory cortex (S1) can modulate cortical inhibitory circuits. Sixteen healthy subjects participated in this study. Cathodal tDCS was positioned over the left M1 (M1 cathodal) or left S1 (S1 cathodal) with an intensity of 1 mA for 10 min. Sham tDCS was applied for 10 min over the left M1 (sham). Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) were recorded from the right abductor pollicis brevis (APB) muscle before the intervention (pre) and 10 and 30 min after the intervention (post 1 and post 2, respectively). Cortical inhibitory circuits were evaluated using short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI). M1 cathodal decreased single-pulse MEP amplitudes at post 1 and decreased SAI at post 1 and post 2; however, SICI did not exhibit any change. S1 cathodal and sham did not show any changes in MEP amplitudes at any of the three time points. These results demonstrated that cathodal tDCS over the M1 not only decreases the M1 excitability but also affects the cortical inhibitory circuits related to SAI.

Modulation of non-painful phantom sensation in subjects with spinal cord injury by means of rTMS

We aimed in this study to investigate whether repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), given as theta burst stimulation (TBS), can interfere with non-painful phantom sensations in subjects with spinal cord injury (SCI). In double-blind, sham-controlled experiments in five subjects with cervical or thoracic traumatic SCI, we evaluated the effects of a single session of inhibitory (continuous) TBS, excitatory (intermittent) TBS, or placebo TBS, on simplex and complex non-painful phantom sensations. The interventions targeted the contralateral primary motor cortex (M1), the primary sensory cortex (S1) and the posterior parietal cortex (PPC). Measurements were carried out at baseline (T0), 5 min (T1) and 30 min later (T2) after the intervention. Descriptive evaluation of results shows that non-painful phantom sensations were not affected by rTMS applied over M1. Continuous (inhibitory) TBS over S1 induced a short-lasting decrease of simple non-painful phantom sensations, while continuous TBS over PPC induced a short-lasting decrease of both simple and complex phantom sensations. Intermittent (excitatory) TBS over PPC induced a slight increase of non-painful phantom sensations. Tests for significance confirm these observations, but must be interpreted with caution because of the small sample size. In conclusion, non-painful phantom sensations may be associated to a hyperexcitability of PPC and to a lesser extent of S1, which can be normalized by inhibitory rTMS. Our preliminary findings provide further evidence that neuromodulatory techniques are able to reverse phantom sensations not only after limb amputation but also in other conditions characterized by deafferentation such as SCI.

Understanding the role of the primary somatosensory cortex: Opportunities for rehabilitation

Emerging evidence indicates impairments in somatosensory function may be a major contributor to motor dysfunction associated with neurologic injury or disorders. However, the neuroanatomical substrates underlying the connection between aberrant sensory input and ineffective motor output are still under investigation. The primary somatosensory cortex (S1) plays a critical role in processing afferent somatosensory input and contributes to the integration of sensory and motor signals necessary for skilled movement. Neuroimaging and neurostimulation approaches provide unique opportunities to non-invasively study S1 structure and function including connectivity with other cortical regions. These research techniques have begun to illuminate casual contributions of abnormal S1 activity and connectivity to motor dysfunction and poorer recovery of motor function in neurologic patient populations. This review synthesizes recent evidence illustrating the role of S1 in motor control, motor learning and functional recovery with an emphasis on how information from these investigations may be exploited to inform stroke rehabilitation to reduce motor dysfunction and improve therapeutic outcomes.

The effect of tonic contraction of the finger muscle on the motor cortical representation of the contracting adjacent muscle

This study examined the effect of tonic contraction of the finger muscle on the motor cortical representation of the contracting adjacent muscle. A representation map of the motor evoked potential (MEP) in the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM) muscles was obtained with the subject at rest or during tonic contraction of the ADM muscle while the FDI muscle was tonically contracted. The center of gravity (COG) of the MEP map in the FDI muscle shifted medially during contraction of the ADM muscle. Motor cortical excitability in the motor cortical representation of the FDI muscle that did not overlap with the motor cortical representation of the ADM muscle was suppressed, but motor cortical excitability in the motor cortical representation of the FDI muscle overlapping with the motor cortical representation of the ADM muscle was not suppressed during contraction of the ADM muscle. The motor cortical representation of the FDI muscle not overlapping with the motor cortical representation of the ADM muscle was located lateral to that of the FDI muscle that did overlap with the motor cortical representation of the ADM muscle. Medial shift of the COG of the motor cortical representation of the contracting finger muscle induced by tonic contraction of the adjacent finger muscle must be due to suppression of motor cortical excitability in the lateral part of the representation, which is not shared by the adjacent representation.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation techniques to study the somatosensory system: research applications

The introduction of brain stimulation research techniques such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has greatly advanced the understanding of the somatosensory system in humans. Over the last several years, several studies have focused on applying TMS in a variety of contexts to alter transiently the excitability of the somatosensory cortex or regions that project to it and exert some control over its activity in specific behavioral contexts. Specific foci that are discussed in this chapter are methods of repetitive TMS, including theta-burst protocols, delivered to the primary somatosensory cortex that have been shown to affect behavioral indices of somatic sensation such as tactile perception. Similar stimulation techniques can also be applied to distant areas that interact with and modulate activity in somatosensory cortex (i.e., attentional or motor networks). For example, suppression of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex modifies the attention-modulation of somatosensory information in modality-specific cortices. Overall this chapter is focused on understanding the interaction of activity in systems that function with the somatosensory system in behavioral contexts. These include systems such as those that control attention, whether sustained or selective between sensory modalities, or those that control movement based on targets present in other sensory systems.

Individualized brain inhibition and excitation profile in response to paired-pulse TMS

Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF) are generated from paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulations (ppTMS) using certain interstimulus intervals (ISIs). ppTMS provides an accessible technique to evaluate inhibitory and facilitatory motor neural circuits. However, SICI and ICF are highly variable such that individual variability is not captured by any one static ISI. The authors hypothesized that individuals may have individualized and relatively stable pattern of SICI-ICF profiles. They tested SICI and ICF profiles using ISIs from 1 to 500 ms, on 2 occasions about 3 weeks apart, and the test-retest reliability, in 23 healthy controls. Moderate-to-good test-retest reliabilities were found at ppTMS with 1 and 3 ms ISIs (SICI) and with 12, 15, 18, and 21 ms ISIs (ICF), but not with other control ISIs. A similar pattern of results was obtained for men and women. Interestingly, the peak facilitation, peak inhibition, and maximum inhibition and facilitation ranges were individualized, such that they varied considerably across individuals but had high repeatability within individual (Cronbach's α = 0.76 to 0.85). Therefore, individuals appear to have unique inhibition-facilitation profiles that are relatively stable. Although the functional implications of individualized profiles are currently unknown, the relatively stable profiles may index underlying neural inhibition and excitation traits.

Combined neurostimulation and neuroimaging in cognitive neuroscience: past, present, and future

Modern neurostimulation approaches in humans provide controlled inputs into the operations of cortical regions, with highly specific behavioral consequences. This enables causal structure–function inferences, and in combination with neuroimaging, has provided novel insights into the basic mechanisms of action of neurostimulation on distributed networks. For example, more recent work has established the capacity of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to probe causal interregional influences, and their interaction with cognitive state changes. Combinations of neurostimulation and neuroimaging now face the challenge of integrating the known physiological effects of neurostimulation with theoretical and biological models of cognition, for example, when theoretical stalemates between opposing cognitive theories need to be resolved. This will be driven by novel developments, including biologically informed computational network analyses for predicting the impact of neurostimulation on brain networks, as well as novel neuroimaging and neurostimulation techniques. Such future developments may offer an expanded set of tools with which to investigate structure–function relationships, and to formulate and reconceptualize testable hypotheses about complex neural network interactions and their causal roles in cognition.

Variability of motor cortical excitability using a novel mapping procedure

The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability of a novel TMS motor cortex mapping procedure. The procedure was designed to take less time and be more clinically useful by delivering fewer MEPS over fewer skull locations. Resting motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from the first dorsal interosseus muscle of 6 individuals over a fixed 15-point grid. Mean MEP amplitudes, map center of gravity (CoG), and stimulus-response characteristics were assessed before and after a 30-min rest session. As a novel feature, subregions of the map were analyzed for regions of highest test-retest reliability for use as a global measure of cortical excitability. Mean MEP amplitudes between sessions were highly reliable (ICC=0.90-0.92). Reproducibility of MEPs was highest along an axis approximately 45° to the nasion-inion. Stimulus-response MEP amplitudes showed moderate to high reliability (ICC 0.54-0.95). Mean CoG shift between sessions was 2.79±1.2mm. This mapping procedure is reliable and allows efficient assessment of motor cortex excitability.

Modifying somatosensory processing with non-invasive brain stimulation

Purposeful manipulation of cortical plasticity and excitability within somatosensory regions may have therapeutic potential. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NBS) techniques such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have shown promise towards this end with certain NBS protocols augmenting somatosensory processing and others down-regulating it. Here, we review NBS protocols which, when applied to primary somatosensory cortex, facilitate cortical excitability and tactile acuity (i.e., high-frequency repetitive TMS (rTMS), intermittent theta burst stimulation (TBS), paired associative stimulation (PAS) N20-5 to 0, anodal tDCS), and protocols that inhibit the same (i.e., low-frequency rTMS, continuous TBS, PAS N20-20, cathodal tDCS). Other studies have targeted multisensory regions of the brain to modulate somatosensory processing. These studies in full present a wide array of strategies in which NBS can be utilized to influence somatosensory processing in a behaviorally and clinically relevant capacity.

Dopamine alters tactile perception in Parkinson's disease

BACKGROUND

Abnormal somatosensory processing may contribute to motor impairments observed in Parkinson's disease (PD). Dopaminergic medications have been shown to alter somatosensory processing such that tactile perception is improved. In PD, it remains unclear whether the temporal sequencing of tactile stimuli is altered and if dopaminergic medications alter this perception.

METHODS

Somatosensory tactile perception was investigated using temporal order judgment in patients with Parkinson's disease on and off dopaminergic medications and in aged-matched healthy controls. Measures of temporal order judgment were acquired using computer controlled stimulation to digits 2 and 3 on the right hand and subjects were required to determine which stimuli occurred first. Two experimental tasks were compared, temporal order judgment without and with synchronization whereby digits 2 and 3 were vibrated synchronously in advance of the temporal order judgment sequence of stimuli.

RESULTS

Temporal order judgment in PD patients of and on medications were similar to controls. Temporal order judgment preceded by synchronous vibration impaired tactical acuity in controls and in PD patients off medications to similar degrees, but this perceptual impairment by synchronous vibration was not present in PD patients on medications.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that dopamine in PD reduces cortico-cortical connectivity with SI and this leads to changes in tactical sensitivity.

How does transcranial magnetic stimulation modify neuronal activity in the brain? Implications for studies of cognition

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) uses a magnetic field to "carry" a short lasting electrical current pulse into the brain where it stimulates neurones, particularly in superficial regions of cerebral cortex. TMS can interfere with cognitive functions in two ways. A high intensity TMS pulse causes a synchronised high frequency burst of discharge in a relatively large population of neurones that is terminated by a long lasting GABAergic inhibition. The combination of artificial synchronisation of activity followed by depression effectively disrupts perceptual, motor and cognitive processes in the human brain. This transient neurodisruption has been termed a "virtual lesion". Smaller intensities of stimulation produce less activity; in such cases, cognitive operations can probably continue but are disrupted because of the added noisy input from the TMS pulse. It is usually argued that if a TMS pulse affects performance, then the area stimulated must provide an essential contribution to behaviour being studied. However, there is one exception to this: the pulse could be applied to an area that is not involved in the task but which has projections to the critical site. Activation of outputs from the site of stimulation could potentially disrupt processing at the distant site, interfering with behaviour without having any involvement in the task. A final important feature of the response to TMS is "context dependency", which indicates that the response depends on how excitable the cortex is at the time the stimulus is applied: if many neurones are close to firing threshold then the more of them are recruited by the pulse than at rest. Many studies have noted this context-dependent modulation. However, it is often assumed that the excitability of an area has a simple relationship to activity in that area. We argue that this is not necessarily the case. Awareness of the problem may help resolve some apparent anomalies in the literature.

Paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation of primary somatosensory cortex differentially modulates perception and sensorimotor transformations

Intermodal selective attention is generally associated with facilitation of relevant information. However, recent studies demonstrate reduced activation of primary somatosensory cortex (S1) with continuous vibrotactile tracking during bimodal stimulation. Reduced activation has been hypothesized to reflect an interaction between the sensorimotor and intermodal requirements of the tracking task. Recently, it has been shown that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) involving a supra-threshold test stimulus (TS) preceded by a sub-threshold conditioning stimulus (CS) adversely affects tactile perception by altering excitability of local intracortical circuits. The purpose of the current paper was to use TMS to assess the effects of differential sensorimotor requirements in the right sensorimotor cortex upon local intracortical networks and sensory processing in the left primary somatosensory cortex during constant multimodal stimulation. Single and paired-pulse TMS was used to probe intracortical networks in S1 and sensory processing during a sensorimotor task where a vibrotactile stimulus to the right index finder guided either continuous or discrete sensorimotor responses of the left hand. It was hypothesized that paired-pulse TMS would alter local intracortical networks and reduce performance during the discrete sensorimotor task, but that these effects would be mitigated during the continuous sensorimotor task, possibly a reflection of reduced S1 activation observed previously during a similar continuous sensorimotor task. Regardless of sensorimotor requirements, single-pulse TMS delivered over S1 decreased sensorimotor performance. Paired-pulse TMS further decreased sensorimotor performance only when the vibrotactile stimulus guided a discrete motor response but not when it was required to continuously guide the motor response. This effect disappeared when the TS was replaced by a sub-threshold stimulus. These results suggest that the CS facilitates sensory output neurons during perceptual detection but that differential responsiveness of local cortical networks in S1 suppresses the CS effects during continuous sensory-guided movement. This study highlights the importance of sensorimotor requirements in determining the net result of task-related sensory processing in S1.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the challenge of coil placement: a comparison of conventional and stereotaxic neuronavigational strategies

The combination of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with functional neuroimaging has expanded the potential of TMS for human brain mapping. The precise and reliable positioning of the TMS coil is not a simple task, however. Modern frameless stereotaxic systems allow investigators to base navigation either on the subject's structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional MRI data, or the use of functional neuroimaging data from the literature, so-called "probabilistic approach." The latter assumes consistency across individuals in the location of task-related "activations" in standardized stereotaxic space. Conventional nonstereotaxic localization of brain areas is also a common method for defining the coil position. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of five different localization strategies in one single study. The left primary motor cortex (left M1-Hand) was used as target region. Three approaches were based on real-time frameless stereotaxy using information based on either anatomical or functional MRI. The remaining two strategies relied either on standard cranial landmarks (i.e., the International 10-20 EEG system) or a standardized function-guided procedure (i.e., the spatial relationship between the left and right M1-Hand). The results were compared to a TMS-based mapping of the primary motor cortex; center of gravity of motor-evoked potentials (MEP-CoG) was calculated for each subject (n = 10). Our findings suggest that highest precision can be achieved with fMRI-guided stimulation, which was accurate within the range of millimeters. Very consistent results were also obtained with the "probabilistic" approach. In view of these findings, we discuss the methods and special characteristics of each localization strategy.

Interactions between pairs of transcranial magnetic stimuli over the human left dorsal premotor cortex differ from those seen in primary motor cortex

A single TMS pulse (110% resting motor threshold, RMT) to the left dorsal premotor cortex (PMd) (CS2) suppresses the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from a test pulse (TS) over the right motor cortex (M1), and facilitates MEPs from the left motor cortex. We probed how this interaction was changed by a prior conditioning pulse over PMd (CS1) using a paired pulse TMS design. In the main experiments, the intensity of CS1 was 80% RMT. Basal suppression of right M1 was removed when CS1-CS2 was 1 ms or 5 ms with a similar tendency at 15 ms. Basal facilitation of left M1 was suppressed at CS1-CS2 of 5 ms. A similar time course was seen if CS2 was increased to 100% RMT, but there was no significant effect if CS1 was 70% RMT. Preconditioning PMd with continuous or intermittent theta burst repetitive TMS (cTBS, iTBS) abolished the basal CS2-TS interaction between premotor and motor cortices. Finally, if very short interstimulus intervals between CS1 and CS2 were explored to detect interactions similar to I-wave facilitation in M1, we found that the basal suppression of right M1 was abolished at CS1-CS2 intervals of 1.8 and 2.8 ms. We suggest that paired pulse TMS may be capable of investigating properties of intrinsic circuits in PMd and that their properties differ from those in the nearby M1. Paired TMS may be a useful method of studying the excitability of intrinsic circuits in non-primary areas of the motor system.

The anterior intraparietal sulcus mediates grasp execution, independent of requirement to update: new insights from transcranial magnetic stimulation

Although a role of the intraparietal sulcus (IPS) in grasping is becoming evident, the specific contribution of regions within the IPS remains undefined. In this vein, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was delivered to the anterior (aIPS), middle (mIPS), and caudal (cIPS) IPS in two tasks designed to dissociate the potential roles of the IPS in either grasp planning or execution (task 1) and its involvement in error detection or error correction (task 2). Determining the involvement of specific regions of the IPS in perceptual (planning and error detection) versus motor (execution and correction) components of grasping allowed us to assess the ecological validity of competing computational models attempting to simulate reach-to-grasp movements. In task 1, we demonstrate that, when no on-line adjustment is necessary, TMS to aIPS (but not mIPS or cIPS) disrupts grasping; this disruption is only elicited when TMS is applied during the execution (but not the planning) phase of the movement. Task 2 reveals that TMS to aIPS (but not mIPS or cIPS) disrupts grasping in the presence of a perturbation; this disruption is only elicited when TMS is applied during the error correction (but not error detection) phase of the movement. We propose that the specific contribution of the aIPS in grasping is in the on-line computation of a difference vector based on motor goal, efference copy, and sensory inputs. This computation is performed for both stable and perturbed motor goals.