Somatosensory-motor cortex interactions measured using dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation

Connecting the dots: harnessing dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation to quantify the causal influence of medial frontal areas on the motor cortex

Dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation has been widely employed to investigate the influence of cortical structures on the primary motor cortex. Here, we leveraged this technique to probe the causal influence of two key areas of the medial frontal cortex, namely the supplementary motor area and the medial orbitofrontal cortex, on primary motor cortex. We show that supplementary motor area stimulation facilitates primary motor cortex activity across short (6 and 8 ms) and long (12 ms) inter-stimulation intervals, putatively recruiting cortico-cortical and cortico-subcortico-cortical circuits, respectively. Crucially, magnetic resonance imaging revealed that this facilitatory effect depended on a key morphometric feature of supplementary motor area: individuals with larger supplementary motor area volumes exhibited more facilitation from supplementary motor area to primary motor cortex for both short and long inter-stimulation intervals. Notably, we also provide evidence that the facilitatory effect of supplementary motor area stimulation at short intervals is unlikely to arise from spinal interactions of volleys descending simultaneously from supplementary motor area and primary motor cortex. On the other hand, medial orbitofrontal cortex stimulation moderately suppressed primary motor cortex activity at both short and long intervals, irrespective of medial orbitofrontal cortex volume. These results suggest that dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation is a fruitful approach to investigate the differential influence of supplementary motor area and medial orbitofrontal cortex on primary motor cortex activity, paving the way for the multimodal assessment of these fronto-motor circuits in health and disease.

Cerebellar transcranial current stimulation – An intraindividual comparison of different techniques

Transcranial current stimulation (tCS) techniques have been shown to induce cortical plasticity. As an important relay in the motor system, the cerebellum is an interesting target for plasticity induction using tCS, aiming to modulate its excitability and connectivity. However, until now it remains unclear, which is the most effective tCS method for inducing plasticity in the cerebellum. Thus, in this study, the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), 50 Hz transcranial alternating current stimulation (50 Hz tACS), and high frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) were compared with sham stimulation in 20 healthy subjects in a within-subject design. tCS was applied targeting the cerebellar lobe VIIIA using neuronavigation. We measured corticospinal excitability, short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI), and cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI) and performed a sensor-based movement analysis at baseline and three times after the intervention (post1 = 15 min; post2 = 55 min; post3 = 95 min). Corticospinal excitability increased following cerebellar tACS and tRNS compared to sham stimulation. This effect was most pronounced directly after stimulation but lasted for at least 55 min after tACS. Cortico-cortical and cerebello-cortical conditioning protocols, as well as sensor-based movement analyses, did not change. Our findings suggest that cerebellar 50 Hz tACS is the most effective protocol to change corticospinal excitability.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the brain: What is stimulated? - A consensus and critical position paper

Transcranial (electro)magnetic stimulation (TMS) is currently the method of choice to non-invasively induce neural activity in the human brain. A single transcranial stimulus induces a time-varying electric field in the brain that may evoke action potentials in cortical neurons. The spatial relationship between the locally induced electric field and the stimulated neurons determines axonal depolarization. The induced electric field is influenced by the conductive properties of the tissue compartments and is strongest in the superficial parts of the targeted cortical gyri and underlying white matter. TMS likely targets axons of both excitatory and inhibitory neurons. The propensity of individual axons to fire an action potential in response to TMS depends on their geometry, myelination and spatial relation to the imposed electric field and the physiological state of the neuron. The latter is determined by its transsynaptic dendritic and somatic inputs, intrinsic membrane potential and firing rate. Modeling work suggests that the primary target of TMS is axonal terminals in the crown top and lip regions of cortical gyri. The induced electric field may additionally excite bends of myelinated axons in the juxtacortical white matter below the gyral crown. Neuronal excitation spreads ortho- and antidromically along the stimulated axons and causes secondary excitation of connected neuronal populations within local intracortical microcircuits in the target area. Axonal and transsynaptic spread of excitation also occurs along cortico-cortical and cortico-subcortical connections, impacting on neuronal activity in the targeted network. Both local and remote neural excitation depend critically on the functional state of the stimulated target area and network. TMS also causes substantial direct co-stimulation of the peripheral nervous system. Peripheral co-excitation propagates centrally in auditory and somatosensory networks, but also produces brain responses in other networks subserving multisensory integration, orienting or arousal. The complexity of the response to TMS warrants cautious interpretation of its physiological and behavioural consequences, and a deeper understanding of the mechanistic underpinnings of TMS will be critical for advancing it as a scientific and therapeutic tool.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Neocortical Neurons: The Micro-Macro Connection

Understanding the operation of cortical circuits is an important and necessary task in both neuroscience and neurorehabilitation. The functioning of the neocortex results from integrative neuronal activity, which can be probed non-invasively by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Despite a clear indication of the direct involvement of cortical neurons in TMS, no explicit connection model has been made between the microscopic neuronal landscape and the macroscopic TMS outcome. Here we have performed an integrative review of multidisciplinary evidence regarding motor cortex neurocytology and TMS-related neurophysiology with the aim of elucidating the micro–macro connections underlying TMS. Neurocytological evidence from animal and human studies has been reviewed to describe the landscape of the cortical neurons covering the taxonomy, morphology, circuit wiring, and excitatory–inhibitory balance. Evidence from TMS studies in healthy humans is discussed, with emphasis on the TMS pulse and paradigm selectivity that reflect the underlying neural circuitry constitution. As a result, we propose a preliminary neuronal model of the human motor cortex and then link the TMS mechanisms with the neuronal model by stimulus intensity, direction of induced current, and paired-pulse timing. As TMS bears great developmental potential for both a probe and modulator of neural network activity and neurotransmission, the connection model will act as a foundation for future combined studies of neurocytology and neurophysiology, as well as the technical advances and application of TMS.

Longitudinal evaluations of somatosensory-motor inhibition in Dopa-responsive dystonia

INTRODUCTION

GCH1 mutations have been linked to decreased striatal dopamine and development of dopa-responsive dystonia (DRD) and Parkinsonism. Sensory and sensorimotor integration impairments have been documented in various forms of dystonia. DRD patients with confirmed GCH1 mutations have demonstrated normal short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI), a measure of sensorimotor inhibition, under chronic dopaminergic replacement therapy (DRT), but reduced inhibition after a single l-dopa dose following 24 h withdrawal. Studies have revealed normal SAI in other forms of dystonia but reductions with DRT in Parkinson's disease. Longitudinal changes in sensorimotor inhibition are unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed sensorimotor inhibition using two different measures: SAI and somatosensory-motor inhibition using dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation (ds-TMS). SAI was measured using digit stimulation 25 ms prior to contralateral primary motor cortex (M1) TMS. DS-TMS was measured using TMS over the somatosensory cortex 1 or 2.5 ms prior to ipsilateral M1 stimulation. A total of 20 GCH1 mutation carriers and 20 age-matched controls were included in the study. SAI and ds-TMS were evaluated in GCH1 mutation carriers both OFF and ON DRT compared to controls. Furthermore, longitudinal changes of SAI were examined in a subset of the same individuals that were measured ∼five years earlier.

RESULTS

Neither SAI nor ds-TMS were significantly different in GCH1 mutation carriers relative to controls. No effects of DRT on SAI or ds-TMS were seen but SAI decreased over time in mutation carriers OFF DRT.

CONCLUSION

Our longitudinal results suggest changes in SAI that could be associated with plasticity changes in sensorimotor networks.

The Interactions Between Primary Somatosensory and Motor Cortex during Human Grasping Behaviors

Afferent inputs to the primary somatosensory cortex (S1) are differentially processed during precision and power grip in humans. However, it remains unclear how S1 interacts with the primary motor cortex (M1) during these two grasping behaviors. To address this question, we measured short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI), reflecting S1-M1 interactions via thalamo-cortical pathways, using paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) during precision and power grip. The TMS coil over the hand representation of M1 was oriented in the posterior-anterior (PA) and anterior-posterior (AP) direction to activate distinct sets of corticospinal neurons. We found that SAI increased during precision compared with power grip when AP, but not PA, currents were applied. Notably, SAI tested in the AP direction were similar during two-digit than five-digit precision grip. The M1 receives movement information from S1 through direct cortico-cortical pathways, so intra-hemispheric S1-M1 interactions using dual-site TMS were also evaluated. Stimulation of S1 attenuated M1 excitability (S1-M1 inhibition) during precision and power grip, while the S1-M1 inhibition ratio remained similar across tasks. Taken together,our findings suggest that distinct neural mechanisms for S1-M1 interactions mediate precision and power grip, presumably by modulating neural activity along thalamo-cortical pathways.

Two forms of short-interval intracortical inhibition in human motor cortex

Background

Pulses of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with a predominantly anterior-posterior (AP) or posterior-anterior (PA) current direction over the primary motor cortex appear to activate distinct excitatory inputs to corticospinal neurons. In contrast, very few reports have examined whether the inhibitory neurons responsible for short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) are sensitive to TMS current direction.

Objectives

To investigate whether SICI evaluated with AP and PA conditioning stimuli (CS_PA and CS_AP) activate different inhibitory pathways. SICI was always assessed using a PA-oriented test stimulus (TS_PA).

Methods

Using two superimposed TMS coils, CS_PA and CS_AP were applied at interstimulus intervals (ISI) of 1–5 ms before a TS_PA, and at a range of different intensities. Using a triple stimulation design, we then tested whether SICI at ISI of 3 ms using opposite directions of CS (SICI_CSPA3 and SICI_CSAP3) interacted differently with three other forms of inhibition, including SICI at ISI of 2 ms (SICI_CSPA2), cerebellum-motor cortex inhibition (CBI 5 ms) and short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI 22 ms). Finally, we compared the effect of tonic and phasic voluntary contraction on SICI_CSPA3 and SICI_CSAP3.

Results

CS_AP produced little SICI at ISIs = 1 and 2 ms. However, at ISI = 3 ms, both CS_AP and CS_PA were equally effective at the same percent of maximum stimulator output. Despite this apparent similarity, combining SICI_CSPA3 or SICI_CSAP3 with other forms of inhibition led to quite different results: SICI_CSPA3 interacted in complex ways with CBI, SAI and SICI_CSPA2, whereas the effect of SICI_CSAP3 appeared to be quite independent of them. Although SICI_CSPA and SICI_CSAP were both reduced by the same amount during voluntary tonic contraction compared with rest, in a simple reaction time task SICI_CSAP was disinhibited much earlier following the imperative signal than SICI_CSPA.

Conclusions

SICI_CSPA appears to activate a different inhibitory pathway to that activated by SICI_CSAP. The difference is behaviourally relevant since the pathways are controlled differently during volitional contraction. The results may explain some previous pathological data and open the possibility of testing whether these pathways are differentially recruited in a range of tasks.

•

Opposite directions of conditioning stimulus (CS) used to suppress MEPs evoked by a conventional test stimulus.

•

Different directions of CS have different time courses of short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI).

•

They also interact differently with short-latency afferent inhibition and with cerebellar inhibition.

•

They are differently affected in a reaction time task.

•

We suggest there are two forms of SICI in motor cortex.

Exploring cortico-cortical interactions during action preparation by means of dual-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation: A systematic review

Action preparation is characterized by a set of complex and distributed processes that occur in multiple brain areas. Interestingly, dual-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a relevant technique to probe effective connectivity between cortical areas, with a high temporal resolution. In the current systematic review, we aimed at providing a detailed picture of the cortico-cortical interactions underlying action preparation focusing on dual-coil TMS studies. We considered four theoretical processes (impulse control, action selection, movement initiation and action reprogramming) and one task modulator (movement complexity). The main findings highlight 1) the interplay between primary motor cortex (M1) and premotor, prefrontal and parietal cortices during action preparation, 2) the varying (facilitatory or inhibitory) cortico-cortical influence depending on the theoretical processes and the TMS timing, and 3) the key role of the supplementary motor area-M1 interactions that shape the preparation of simple and complex movements. These findings are of particular interest for clinical perspectives, with a need to better characterize functional connectivity deficiency in clinical population with altered action preparation.

Interhemispheric interactions between the right angular gyrus and the left motor cortex: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study

The interconnection of the angular gyrus of right posterior parietal cortex (PPC) and the left motor cortex (LM1) is essential for goal-directed hand movements. Previous work with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) showed that right PPC stimulation increases LM1 excitability, but right PPC followed by left PPC-LM1 stimulation (LPPC-LM1) inhibits LM1 corticospinal output compared with LPPC-LM1 alone. It is not clear if right PPC-mediated inhibition of LPPC-LM1 is due to inhibition of left PPC or to combined effects of right and left PPC stimulation on LM1 excitability. We used paired-pulse TMS to study the extent to which combined right and left PPC stimulation, targeting the angular gyri, influences LM1 excitability. We tested 16 healthy subjects in five paired-pulsed TMS experiments using MRI-guided neuronavigation to target the angular gyri within PPC. We tested the effects of different right angular gyrus (RAG) and LM1 stimulation intensities on the influence of RAG on LM1 and on influence of left angular gyrus (LAG) on LM1 (LAG-LM1). We then tested the effects of RAG and LAG stimulation on LM1 short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF), short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), and long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI). The results revealed that RAG facilitated LM1, inhibited SICF, and inhibited LAG-LM1. Combined RAG-LAG stimulation did not affect SICI but increased LICI. These experiments suggest that RAG-mediated inhibition of LAG-LM1 is related to inhibition of early indirect (I)-wave activity and enhancement of GABA_B receptor-mediated inhibition in LM1. The influence of RAG on LM1 likely involves ipsilateral connections from LAG to LM1 and heterotopic connections from RAG to LM1.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Goal-directed hand movements rely on the right and left angular gyri (RAG and LAG) and motor cortex (M1), yet how these brain areas functionally interact is unclear. Here, we show that RAG stimulation facilitated right hand motor output from the left M1 but inhibited indirect (I)-waves in M1. Combined RAG and LAG stimulation increased GABA_B, but not GABA_A, receptor-mediated inhibition in left M1. These findings highlight unique brain interactions between the RAG and left M1.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and the Understanding of Behavior

The development of the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the study of psychological functions has entered a new phase of sophistication. This is largely due to an increasing physiological knowledge of its effects and to its being used in combination with other experimental techniques. This review presents the current state of our understanding of the mechanisms of TMS in the context of designing and interpreting psychological experiments. We discuss the major conceptual advances in behavioral studies using TMS. There are meaningful physiological and technical achievements to review, as well as a wealth of new perceptual and cognitive experiments. In doing so we summarize the different uses and challenges of TMS in mental chronometry, perception, awareness, learning, and memory.

Using Dual-Site Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Probe Connectivity between the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex and Ipsilateral Primary Motor Cortex in Humans

Dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation to the primary motor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) can be used to probe functional connectivity between these regions. The purpose of this study was to characterize the effect of DLPFC stimulation on ipsilateral M1 excitability while participants were at rest and contracting the left- and right-hand first dorsal interosseous muscle. Twelve participants were tested in two separate sessions at varying inter-stimulus intervals (ISI: 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, and 20 ms) at two different conditioning stimulus intensities (80% and 120% of resting motor threshold). No significant effect on ipsilateral M1 excitability was found when applying a conditioning stimulus over DLPFC at any specific inter-stimulus interval or intensity in either the left or right hemisphere. Our findings suggest neither causal inhibitory nor faciliatory influences of DLPFC on ipsilateral M1 activity while participants were at rest or when performing an isometric contraction in the target hand muscle.