EMG breakthrough during cortical silent period in congenital hemiparesis: a descriptive case series

Anatomo-Functional Origins of the Cortical Silent Period: Spotlight on the Basal Ganglia

The so-called cortical silent period (CSP) refers to the temporary interruption of electromyographic signal from a muscle following a motor-evoked potential (MEP) triggered by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1). The neurophysiological origins of the CSP are debated. Previous evidence suggests that both spinal and cortical mechanisms may account for the duration of the CSP. However, contextual factors such as cortical fatigue, experimental procedures, attentional load, as well as neuropathology can also influence the CSP duration. The present paper summarizes the most relevant evidence on the mechanisms underlying the duration of the CSP, with a particular focus on the central role of the basal ganglia in the "direct" (excitatory), "indirect" (inhibitory), and "hyperdirect" cortico-subcortical pathways to manage cortical motor inhibition. We propose new methods of interpretation of the CSP related, at least partially, to the inhibitory hyperdirect and indirect pathways in the basal ganglia. This view may help to explain the respective shortening and lengthening of the CSP in various neurological disorders. Shedding light on the complexity of the CSP's origins, the present review aims at constituting a reference for future work in fundamental research, technological development, and clinical settings.

TMS-induced silent periods: A review of methods and call for consistency

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-induced silent periods provide an in vivo measure of human motor cortical inhibitory function. Cortical silent periods (cSP, also sometimes referred to as contralateral silent periods) and ipsilateral silent periods (iSP) may change with advancing age and disease and can provide insight into cortical control of the motor system. The majority of past silent period work has implemented largely varying methodology, sometimes including subjective analyses and incomplete methods descriptions. This limits reproducibility of silent period work and hampers comparisons of silent period measures across studies. Here, we discuss methodological differences in past silent period work, highlighting how these choices affect silent period outcome measures. We also outline challenges and possible solutions for measuring silent periods in the unique case of the lower limbs. Finally, we provide comprehensive recommendations for collection, analysis, and reporting of future silent period studies.