Simultaneous application of slow-oscillation transcranial direct current stimulation and theta burst stimulation prolongs continuous theta burst stimulation-induced suppression of corticomotor excitability in humans

Exploring the Influence of Inter-Trial Interval on the Assessment of Short-Interval Intracortical Inhibition

Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) is a common paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measure used to assess primary motor cortex (M1) interneuron activity in healthy populations and in neurological disorders. Many of the parameters of TMS stimulation to most accurately measure SICI have been determined. However, one TMS parameter that has not been investigated is the time between SICI trials (termed inter-trial interval; ITI). This is despite a series of single-pulse TMS studies which have reported that motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude were suppressed for short, but not long ITIs in approximately the initial ten trials of a TMS block of 20-30 trials. The primary purpose was to examine the effects of ITI on the quantification of SICI at rest. A total of 23 healthy adults completed an experimental session that included four SICI trial blocks. Each block utilized a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s) and was comprised of a total of 26 SICI trials divided into three epochs. ANOVA revealed that the main effects for ITI and epoch as well as their interaction were all non-statistically significant for SICI. We conclude that the shorter (4-6 s) ITIs used in studies investigating SICI should not alter the interpretation of M1 activity, while having the advantages of being more comfortable to participants and reducing the experimental time needed to evaluate perform single and paired-pulse TMS experiments.

The Influence of Different Inter-Trial Intervals on the Quantification of Intracortical Facilitation in the Primary Motor Cortex

Intracortical facilitation (ICF) is a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measurement used to quantify interneuron activity in the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy populations and motor disorders. Due to the prevalence of the technique, most of the stimulation parameters to optimize ICF quantification have been established. However, the underappreciated methodological issue of the time between ICF trials (inter-trial interval; ITI) has been unstandardized, and different ITIs have never been compared in a paired-pulse TMS study. This is important because single-pulse TMS studies have found motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude reductions over time during TMS trial blocks for short, but not long ITIs. The primary purpose was to determine the influence of different ITIs on the measurement of ICF. Twenty adults completed one experimental session that involved 4 separate ICF trial blocks with each utilizing a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s). Two-way ANOVAs indicated no significant ITI main effects for test MEP amplitudes, condition-test MEP amplitudes, and therefore ICF. Accordingly, all ITIs studied provided nearly identical ICF values when averaged over entire trial blocks. Therefore, it is recommended that ITIs of 4-6 s be utilized for ICF quantification to optimize participant comfort and experiment time efficiency.

External induction and stabilization of brain oscillations in the human

Background

Neural oscillations in the cerebral cortex are associated with a range of cognitive processes and neuropsychiatric disorders. However, non-invasively modulating oscillatory activity remains technically challenging, due to limited strength, duration, or non-synchronization of stimulation waveforms with endogenous rhythms.

Objective

We hypothesized that applying controllable phase-synchronized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation pulses (rTMS) with alternating currents (tACS) may induce and stabilize neuro-oscillatory resting-state activity at targeted frequencies.

Methods

Using a novel circuit to precisely synchronize rTMS pulses with phase of tACS, we empirically tested whether combined, 10-Hz prefrontal bilateral stimulation could induce and stabilize 10-Hz oscillations in the bilateral prefrontal cortex (PFC). 25 healthy participants took part in a repeated-measures design. Whole-brain resting-state EEG in eyes-open (EO) and eyes-closed (EC) was recorded before (baseline), immediately (1-min), and 15- and 30-min after stimulation. Bilateral, phase-synchronized rTMS aligned to the positive tACS peak was compared with rTMS at tACS trough, with bilateral tACS or rTMS on its own, and to sham.

Results

10-Hz resting-state PFC power increased significantly with peak-synchronized rTMS + tACS (EO: 44.64%, EC: 46.30%, p < 0.05) compared to each stimulation protocol on its own, and sham, with effects spanning between prefrontal and parietal regions and sustaining throughout 30-min. No effects were observed with the sham protocol. Moreover, rTMS timed to the negative tACS trough did not induce local or global changes in oscillations.

Conclusion

Phase-synchronizing rTMS with tACS may be a viable approach for inducing and stabilizing neuro-oscillatory activity, particularly in scenarios where endogenous oscillatory tone is attenuated, such as disorders of consciousness or major depression.

•

Non-invasively inducing and stabilizing neural oscillations remains challenging.

•

We develop a controllable phase-synchronized circuit to combine rTMS and tACS.

•

This circuit was tested for inducing 10 Hz oscillations in healthy prefrontal cortex.

•

10 Hz rTMS synchronized to the positive 10 Hz tACS peak induced stable after-effects.

•

Phase-synchronized stimulation is a viable approach for oscillatory neuromodulation.

Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines

This article is based on a consensus conference, promoted and supported by the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN), which took place in Siena (Italy) in October 2018. The meeting intended to update the ten-year-old safety guidelines for the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical settings (Rossi et al., 2009). Therefore, only emerging and new issues are covered in detail, leaving still valid the 2009 recommendations regarding the description of conventional or patterned TMS protocols, the screening of subjects/patients, the need of neurophysiological monitoring for new protocols, the utilization of reference thresholds of stimulation, the managing of seizures and the list of minor side effects. New issues discussed in detail from the meeting up to April 2020 are safety issues of recently developed stimulation devices and pulse configurations; duties and responsibility of device makers; novel scenarios of TMS applications such as in the neuroimaging context or imaging-guided and robot-guided TMS; TMS interleaved with transcranial electrical stimulation; safety during paired associative stimulation interventions; and risks of using TMS to induce therapeutic seizures (magnetic seizure therapy). An update on the possible induction of seizures, theoretically the most serious risk of TMS, is provided. It has become apparent that such a risk is low, even in patients taking drugs acting on the central nervous system, at least with the use of traditional stimulation parameters and focal coils for which large data sets are available. Finally, new operational guidelines are provided for safety in planning future trials based on traditional and patterned TMS protocols, as well as a summary of the minimal training requirements for operators, and a note on ethics of neuroenhancement.

Boosting the LTP-like plasticity effect of intermittent theta-burst stimulation using gamma transcranial alternating current stimulation

BACKGROUND

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) consists in delivering electric current to the brain using an oscillatory pattern that may entrain the rhythmic activity of cortical neurons. When delivered at gamma frequency, tACS modulates motor performance and GABA-A-ergic interneuron activity.

OBJECTIVE

Since interneuronal discharges play a crucial role in brain plasticity phenomena, here we co-stimulated the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy subjects by means of tACS during intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS), a transcranial magnetic stimulation paradigm known to induce long-term potentiation (LTP)-like plasticity.

METHODS

We measured and compared motor evoked potentials before and after gamma, beta and sham tACS-iTBS. While we delivered gamma-tACS, we also measured short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) to detect any changes in GABA-A-ergic neurotransmission.

RESULTS

Gamma, but not beta and sham tACS, significantly boosted and prolonged the iTBS-induced after-effects. Interestingly, the extent of the gamma tACS-iTBS after-effects correlated directly with SICI changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our findings point to a link between gamma oscillations, interneuronal GABA-A-ergic activity and LTP-like plasticity in the human M1. Gamma tACS-iTBS co-stimulation might represent a new strategy to enhance and prolong responses to plasticity-inducing protocols, thereby lending itself to future applications in the neurorehabilitation setting.

Use of theta-burst stimulation in changing excitability of motor cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Noninvasive brain stimulation has been demonstrated to modulate cortical activity in humans. In particular, theta burst stimulation (TBS) has gained notable attention due to its ability to induce lasting physiological changes after short stimulation durations. The present study aimed to provide a comprehensive meta-analytic review of the efficacy of two TBS paradigms; intermittent (iTBS) and continuous (cTBS), on corticospinal excitability in healthy individuals. Literature searches yielded a total of 87 studies adhering to the inclusion criteria. iTBS yielded moderately large MEP increases lasting up to 30 min with a pooled SMD of 0.71 (p<0.00001). cTBS produced a reduction in MEP amplitudes lasting up to 60 min, with the largest effect size seen at 5 min post stimulation (SMD=-0.9, P<0.00001). The collected studies were of heterogeneous nature, and a series of tests conducted indicated a degree of publication bias. No significant change in SICI and ICF was observed, with exception to decrease in SICI with cTBS at the early time point (SMD=0.42, P=0.00036). The results also highlight several factors contributing to TBS efficacy, including the number of pulses, frequency of stimulation and BDNF polymorphisms. Further research investigating optimal TBS stimulation parameters, particularly for iTBS, is needed in order for these paradigms to be successfully translated into clinical settings.

Efficacy and Time Course of Theta Burst Stimulation in Healthy Humans

BACKGROUND

In the past decade research has shown that continuous (cTBS) and intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) alter neuronal excitability levels in the primary motor cortex.

OBJECTIVE

Quantitatively review the magnitude and time course on cortical excitability of cTBS and iTBS.

METHODS

Sixty-four TBS studies published between January 2005 and October 2014 were retrieved from the scientific search engine PubMED and included for analyses. The main inclusion criteria involved stimulation of the primary motor cortex in healthy volunteers with no motor practice prior to intervention and motor evoked potentials as primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

ITBS applied for 190 s significantly increases cortical excitability up to 60 min with a mean maximum potentiation of 35.54 ± 3.32%. CTBS applied for 40 s decreases cortical excitability up to 50 min with a mean maximum depression of -22.81 ± 2.86%, while cTBS applied for 20 s decreases cortical excitability (mean maximum -27.84 ± 4.15%) for 20 min.

CONCLUSION

The present findings offer normative insights into the magnitude and time course of TBS-induced changes in cortical excitability levels.