Possible role of backpropagating action potentials in corticospinal neurons in I-wave periodicity following a TMS pulse

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.

Multipulse transcranial magnetic stimulation of human motor cortex produces short-latency corticomotor facilitation via two distinct mechanisms

Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the precentral hand representation (M1_HAND) can elicit indirect waves in the corticospinal tract at a periodicity of ∼660 Hz, called I-waves. These descending volleys are produced by transsynaptic excitation of fast-conducting corticospinal axons in M1_HAND. Paired-pulse TMS can induce short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF) of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) at interpulse intervals that match I-wave periodicity. This study examined whether short-latency corticospinal facilitation engages additional mechanisms independently of I-wave periodicity. In 19 volunteers, one to four biphasic TMS pulses were applied to left M1_HAND with interpulse intervals adjusted to the first peak or trough of the individual SICF curve at different intensities to probe the intensity-response relationship. Multipulse TMS_HAND at individual peak latency facilitated MEP amplitudes and reduced resting motor threshold (RMT) compared with single pulses. Multipulse TMS_HAND at individual trough latency also produced a consistent facilitation of MEPs and a reduction of RMT. Short-latency facilitation at trough latency was less pronounced, but the relative difference in facilitation decreased with increasing stimulus intensity. Increasing the pulse number had only a modest effect. Two mechanisms underlie short-latency facilitation caused by biphasic multipulse TMS_HAND. One intracortical mechanism is related to I-wave periodicity and engages fast-conducting direct projections to spinal motoneurons. A second corticospinal mechanism does not rely on I-wave rhythmicity and may be mediated by slower-conducting indirect pyramidal tract projections from M1_HAND to spinal interneurons. The latter mechanism deserves more attention in studies of the corticomotor system and its link to manual motor control using the MEP.NEW & NOTEWORTHY TMS pairs evoke SICF at interpulse intervals (IPIs) that match I-wave periodicity. Biphasic bursts with IPIs at the latency of the first peak facilitate MEPs and reduce corticomotor threshold. Bursts at the latency of the first trough facilitate MEPs and reduce corticomotor threshold to a lesser extent. TMS bursts facilitate corticomotor excitability via two mechanisms: SICF-dependently via fast-conducting direct projections from M1_HAND to spinal motoneurons and SICF-independently, probably through slower-conducting indirect pyramidal tract projections.

TMS and neocortical neurons: an integrative review on the micro-macro connection in neuroplasticity

Tian D, Izumi S. TMS and neocortical neurons: an integrative review on the micro-macro connection in neuroplasticity. Jpn J Compr Rehabil Sci 2023; 14: 1-9. Neuroplasticity plays a pivotal role in neuroscience and neurorehabilitation as it bridges the organization and reorganization properties of the brain. Among the numerous neuroplastic protocols, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a well-established non-invasive protocol to induce plastic changes in the brain. Here, we review the findings of four plasticity-inducing TMS protocols in the human motor cortex with relatively evident mechanisms: conventional repetitive TMS (rTMS), theta-burst stimulation (TBS), quadripulse stimulation (QPS) and paired associative stimulation (PAS). Based on the reviewed evidence and a preliminary TMS neurocytological model proposed in our previous report, we further integrate the neurophysiological evidence and plasticity rules of these protocols to present an updated micro-macro connection model between neocortical neurons and the neurophysiological evidence in TMS. This prototypical model will guide further efforts to understand the neural circuit of the motor cortex, the mechanisms of TMS, and the advance of neuroplasticity technologies and their outcomes.

Impaired phase synchronization of motor-evoked potentials reflects the degree of motor dysfunction in the lesioned human brain

The functional corticospinal integrity (CSI) can be indexed by motor-evoked potentials (MEP) following transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex. Glial brain tumors in motor-eloquent areas are frequently disturbing CSI resulting in different degrees of motor dysfunction. However, this is unreliably mirrored by MEP characteristics. In 59 consecutive patients with diffuse glial tumors and 21 healthy controls (CTRL), we investigated the conventional MEP features, that is, resting motor threshold (RMT), amplitudes and latencies. In addition, frequency-domain MEP features were analyzed to estimate the event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP), and the induced phase synchronization by intertrial coherence (ITC). The clinical motor status was captured including the Medical Research Council Scale (MRCS), the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT), and the intake of antiepileptic drugs (AED). Motor function was classified according to MRCS and GPT as no motor deficit (NMD), fine motor deficits (FMD) and gross motor deficits (GMD). CSI was assessed by diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI). Motor competent subjects (CTRL and NMD) had similar ERSP and ITC values. The presence of a motor deficit (FMD and GMD) was associated with an impairment of high-frequency ITC (150-300 Hz). GMD and damage to the CSI demonstrated an additional reduction of high-frequency ERSP (150-300 Hz). GABAergic AED increased ERSP but not ITC. Notably, groups were indistinguishable based on conventional MEP features. Estimating MEP phase synchronization provides information about the corticospinal transmission after transcranial magnetic stimulation and reflects the degree of motor impairment that is not captured by conventional measures.

Intensity dependency of peripheral nerve stimulation in spinal LTP induced by paired associative corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation (PCMS)

Paired associative corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation (PCMS) induces plasticity at synapses between corticospinal tracts (CSTs) and spinal motoneurons (SMs). We investigated the effects of peripheral nerve electrical stimulation (PNS) intensity on PCMS-induced plasticity. PCMS consisted of 180 paired stimuli of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the left primary motor cortex with PNS on the right ulnar nerve at the wrist. We compared effects induced by different PNS intensities: supramaximal, twice and three times sensory threshold intensities. For evaluating efficacy of the synapse between CSTs and SMs, single-pulse TMS was delivered at cervicomedullary junction level, and cervicomedullary motor-evoked potentials (CMEPs) were recorded from the right first-dorsal interosseous muscle before and after PCMS. PCMS with the supramaximal PNS intensity increased CMEP amplitude. The facilitatory effect of PCMS with the supramaximal PNS was larger than those of PCMS with weaker PNS intensities. Sham TMS with the supramaximal PNS showed no CMEP changes after the intervention. PNS intensity of PCMS influences the magnitude of synaptic plasticity induction between the CSTs and SMs at the spinal level, and the supramaximal intensity is the best for induction of long-term potentiation-like effects. The PNS intensity may influence the number of activated SMs by axonal backpropagating pulses with PNS which must overlap with descending volleys induced by TMS.

Preferential Activation of Unique Motor Cortical Networks With Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Review of the Physiological, Functional, and Clinical Evidence

OBJECTIVES

The corticospinal volley produced by application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over primary motor cortex consists of a number of waves generated by trans-synaptic input from interneuronal circuits. These indirect (I)-waves mediate the sensitivity of TMS to cortical plasticity and intracortical excitability and can be assessed by altering the direction of cortical current induced by TMS. While this methodological approach has been conventionally viewed as preferentially recruiting early or late I-wave inputs from a given populations of neurons, growing evidence suggests recruitment of different neuronal populations, and this would strongly influence interpretation and application of these measures. The aim of this review is therefore to consider the physiological, functional, and clinical evidence for the independence of the neuronal circuits activated by different current directions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To provide the relevant context, we begin with an overview of TMS methodology, focusing on the different techniques used to quantify I-waves. We then comprehensively review the literature that has used variations in coil orientation to investigate the I-wave circuits, grouping studies based on the neurophysiological, functional, and clinical relevance of their outcomes.

RESULTS

Review of the existing literature reveals significant evidence supporting the idea that varying current direction can recruit different neuronal populations having unique functionally and clinically relevant characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research providing greater characterization of the I-wave circuits activated with different current directions is required. This will facilitate the development of interventions that are able to modulate specific intracortical circuits, which will be an important application of TMS.

I-waves in motor cortex revisited

I-waves represent high-frequency (~ 600 Hz) repetitive discharge of corticospinal fibers elicited by single-pulse stimulation of motor cortex. First detected and examined in animal preparations, this multiple discharge can also be recorded in humans from the corticospinal tract with epidural spinal electrodes. The exact underpinning neurophysiology of I-waves is still unclear, but there is converging evidence that they originate at the cortical level through synaptic input from specific excitatory interneuronal circuitries onto corticomotoneuronal cells, controlled by GABAAergic interneurons. In contrast, there is at present no supportive evidence for the alternative hypothesis that I-waves are generated by high-frequency oscillations of the membrane potential of corticomotoneuronal cells upon initial strong depolarization. Understanding I-wave physiology is essential for understanding how TMS activates the motor cortex.