On the variability of motor-evoked potentials: experimental results and mathematical model

A comparison of techniques to determine active motor threshold for transcranial magnetic stimulation research

The determination of active motor threshold (AMT) is a critical step in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) research. As AMT is frequently determined using an absolute electromyographic (EMG) threshold (e.g., 200 µV peak-to-peak amplitude), wide variation in EMG recordings across participants has given reason to consider relative thresholds (e.g., = 2 × background sEMG) for AMT determination. However, these approaches have not been systemically compared. Our purpose was to compare AMT estimations derived from absolute and relative criteria commonly used in the quadriceps, and assess the test-retest reliability of each approach. We used a repeated measures design to assess AMT estimations in the vastus lateralis (VL) from eighteen young adults (9 males and 9 females; mean ± SD age = 23 ± 2 years) across two laboratory visits. AMT was determined for each criterion, at each lab visit. A paired samples t-test was used to compare mean differences in AMT estimations during the second laboratory visit. Paired samples t-tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1) were calculated to assess test-retest reliability of each criterion. Differences between the criteria were small and not statistically significant (p = 0.309). The absolute criterion demonstrated moderate to excellent reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.866 [0.648-0.950]), but higher AMTs were observed in the second visit (p = 0.043). The relative criteria demonstrated good-to-excellent test-retest reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.894 [0.746-0.959]) and AMTs were not different between visits (p = 0.420). TMS researchers aiming to track corticospinal characteristics across visits should consider implementing relative criterion approaches during their AMT determination protocol.

Three novel methods for determining motor threshold with transcranial magnetic stimulation outperform conventional procedures

Objective. Thresholding of neural responses is central to many applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), but the stochastic aspect of neuronal activity and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) challenges thresholding techniques. We analyzed existing methods for obtaining TMS motor threshold and their variations, introduced new methods from other fields, and compared their accuracy and speed.Approach. In addition to existing relative-frequency methods, such as the five-out-of-ten method, we examined adaptive methods based on a probabilistic motor threshold model using maximum-likelihood (ML) or maximuma-posteriori(MAP) estimation. To improve the performance of these adaptive estimation methods, we explored variations in the estimation procedure and inclusion of population-level prior information. We adapted a Bayesian estimation method which iteratively incorporated information of the TMS responses into the probability density function. A family of non-parametric stochastic root-finding methods with different convergence criteria and stepping rules were explored as well. The performance of the thresholding methods was evaluated with an independent stochastic MEP model.Main Results. The conventional relative-frequency methods required a large number of stimuli, were inherently biased on the population level, and had wide error distributions for individual subjects. The parametric estimation methods obtained the thresholds much faster and their accuracy depended on the estimation method, with performance significantly improved when population-level prior information was included. Stochastic root-finding methods were comparable to adaptive estimation methods but were much simpler to implement and did not rely on a potentially inaccurate underlying estimation model.Significance. Two-parameter MAP estimation, Bayesian estimation, and stochastic root-finding methods have better error convergence compared to conventional single-parameter ML estimation, and all these methods require significantly fewer TMS pulses for accurate estimation than conventional relative-frequency methods. Stochastic root-finding appears particularly attractive due to the low computational requirements, simplicity of the algorithmic implementation, and independence from potential model flaws in the parametric estimators.

Motor potentials evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation: interpreting a simple measure of a complex system

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive technique that is increasingly used to study the human brain. One of the principal outcome measures is the motor-evoked potential (MEP) elicited in a muscle following TMS over the primary motor cortex (M1), where it is used to estimate changes in corticospinal excitability. However, multiple elements play a role in MEP generation, so even apparently simple measures such as peak-to-peak amplitude have a complex interpretation. Here, we summarize what is currently known regarding the neural pathways and circuits that contribute to the MEP and discuss the factors that should be considered when interpreting MEP amplitude measured at rest in the context of motor processing and patients with neurological conditions. In the last part of this work, we also discuss how emerging technological approaches can be combined with TMS to improve our understanding of neural substrates that can influence MEPs. Overall, this review aims to highlight the capabilities and limitations of TMS that are important to recognize when attempting to disentangle sources that contribute to the physiological state-related changes in corticomotor excitability.

Paired corticomotoneuronal stimulation of the preactivated ankle dorsiflexor: an open-label study of magnetic and electrical painless protocols

Paired corticomotoneuronal stimulation (or electrical PCMS: ePCMS) is the repetitive pairing of an electrical stimulus to a nerve with a transcranial magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex (TMS-of-M1) to noninvasively influence spinal plasticity. We compared ePCMS with the new painless PCMS protocol pairing a magnetic stimulus to the nerve with TMS-of-M1 (mPCMS) in the preactivated tibial anterior muscle (TA). Sixteen healthy adults participated in two sessions (mPCMS, ePCMS), each with 180 pairs of [low-intensity TMS-of-M1 + nerve stimulation] at 0.2 Hz. TA motor-evoked potentials (MEP) to single-pulse TMS at pre-PCMS, immediately and 30 min after PCMS, were cluster-analyzed to discriminate responders and non-responders. Paired-pulse TMS-of-M1 and F-waves were also tested and BDNF polymorphism influence was explored. Both PCMS protocols significantly increased MEP amplitudes (n = 9 responders each), but the time-course differed with mPCMS inducing larger MEP increase over time. The number of BDNF-methionine carriers tended to be larger than Val66Val in mPCMS and the reverse in ePCMS, thus warranting further investigations. The MEP changes of the preactivated TA likely occurred at the pre-motoneuronal level and larger mPCMS after-effects over time may be related to the afferents recruited. mPCMS seems relevant to be tested in future studies as a painless noninvasive approach to induce sustained pre-motoneuronal plasticity in spinal cord injury.

Short periods of bipolar anodal TDCS induce no instantaneous dose-dependent increase in cerebral blood flow in the targeted human motor cortex

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (aTDCS) of primary motor hand area (M1-HAND) can enhance corticomotor excitability, but it is still unknown which current intensity produces the strongest effect on intrinsic neural firing rates and synaptic activity. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with pseudo-continuous Arterial Spin Labeling (pcASL MRI) can map regional cortical blood flow (rCBF). The measured rCBF signal is sensitive to regional changes in neuronal activity due to neurovascular coupling. Therefore, concurrent TDCS and pcASL MRI may reveal the relationship between current intensity and TDCS-induced changes in overall firing rates and synaptic activity in the cortical target. Here we employed pcASL MRI to map acute rCBF changes during short-duration aTDCS of left M1-HAND. Using the rCBF response as a proxy for regional neuronal activity, we investigated if short-duration aTDCS produces an instantaneous dose-dependent rCBF increase in the targeted M1-HAND that may be useful for individual dosing. Nine healthy right-handed participants received 30 s of aTDCS at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 mA with the anode placed over left M1-HAND and cathode over the right supraorbital region. Concurrent pcASL MRI at 3 T probed TDCS-related rCBF changes in the targeted M1-HAND. Movement-induced rCBF changes were also assessed. Apart from a subtle increase in rCBF at 0.5 mA, short-duration aTDCS did not modulate rCBF in the M1-HAND relative to no-stimulation periods. None of the participants showed a dose-dependent increase in rCBF during aTDCS, even after accounting for individual differences in TDCS-induced electrical field strength. In contrast, finger movements led to robust activation of left M1-HAND before and after aTDCS. Short-duration bipolar aTDCS does not produce consistant instantaneous dose-dependent rCBF increases in the targeted M1-HAND at conventional intensity ranges. Therefore, the regional hemodynamic response profile to short-duration aTDCS may not be suited to inform individual dosing of TDCS intensity.