Repetitive paired-pulse TMS increases motor cortex excitability and visuomotor skill acquisition in young and older adults

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over primary motor cortex (M1) recruits indirect (I) waves that can be modulated by repetitive paired-pulse TMS (rppTMS). The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of rppTMS on M1 excitability and visuomotor skill acquisition in young and older adults. A total of 37 healthy adults (22 young, 18-32 yr; 15 older, 60-79 yr) participated in a study that involved rppTMS at early (1.4 ms) and late (4.5 ms) interstimulus intervals (ISIs), followed by the performance of a visuomotor training task. M1 excitability was examined with motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes and short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF) using posterior-anterior (PA) and anterior-posterior (AP) TMS current directions. We found that rppTMS increased M1 excitability in young and old adults, with the greatest effects for PA TMS at the late ISI (4.5 ms). Motor skill acquisition was improved by rppTMS at an early (1.4 ms) but not late (4.5 ms) ISI in young and older adults. An additional study using a non-I-wave interval (3.5 ms) also showed increased M1 excitability and visuomotor skill acquisition. These findings show that rppTMS at both I-wave and non-I-wave intervals can alter M1 excitability and improve visuomotor skill acquisition in young and older adults.

Motor cortex plasticity is greater in endurance-trained cyclists following acute exercise

Previous research using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has shown that plasticity within primary motor cortex (M1) is greater in people who undertake regular exercise, and a single session of aerobic exercise can increase M1 plasticity in untrained participants. This study aimed to examine the effect of an acute bout of exercise on M1 plasticity in endurance-trained (cyclists) and sedentary individuals. 14 endurance-trained cyclists (mean ± SD; 23 ± 3.8 years) and 14 sedentary individuals (22 ± 1.8 years) performed two experimental sessions. One session included an acute bout of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) exercise involving stationary cycling, while another session involved no-exercise (control). Following exercise (or control), I-wave periodicity repetitive TMS (iTMS) was used (1.5 ms interval, 180 pairs) to induce plasticity within M1. Motor evoked potentials (MEP) induced by single and paired-pulse TMS over M1 were recorded from a hand muscle at baseline, after HIIT (or control) exercise, and after iTMS. Corticospinal and intracortical excitability was not influenced by HIIT exercise in either group (all P > 0.05). There was an increase in MEP amplitude after iTMS, and this was greater after HIIT exercise (compared with control) for all subjects (P < 0.001). However, the magnitude of this response was larger in endurance cyclists compared with the sedentary group (P < 0.05). These findings indicate that M1 plasticity induced by iTMS was greater in endurance-trained cyclists following HIIT. Prior history of exercise training is, therefore, an important consideration for understanding factors that contribute to exercise-induced plasticity.

Utilising TMS-EEG to Assess the Response to Cerebellar-Brain Inhibition

Cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI) is a transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) paradigm indexing excitability of cerebellar projections to motor cortex (M1). Stimulation involved with CBI is often considered to be uncomfortable, and alternative ways to index connectivity between cerebellum and the cortex would be valuable. We therefore sought to assess the utility of electroencephalography in conjunction with TMS (combined TMS-EEG) to record the response to CBI. A total of 33 volunteers (25.7 ± 4.9 years, 20 females) participated across three experiments. These investigated EEG responses to CBI induced with a figure-of-eight (F8; experiment 1) or double cone (DC; experiment 2) conditioning coil over cerebellum, in addition to multisensory sham stimulation (experiment 3). Both F8 and DC coils suppressed early TMS-evoked EEG potentials (TEPs) produced by TMS to M1 (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the TEP produced by CBI stimulation was related to the motor inhibitory response to CBI recorded in a hand muscle (P < 0.05), but only when using the DC coil. Multisensory sham stimulation failed to modify the M1 TEP. Cerebellar conditioning produced changes in the M1 TEP that were not apparent following sham stimulation, and that were related to the motor inhibitory effects of CBI. Our findings therefore suggest that it is possible to index the response to CBI using TMS-EEG. In addition, while both F8 and DC coils appear to recruit cerebellar projections, the nature of these may be different.

TMS coil orientation and muscle activation influence lower limb intracortical excitability

INTRODUCTION

Previous research with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) indicates that coil orientation (TMS current direction) and muscle activation state (rest or active) modify corticospinal and intracortical excitability of upper limb muscles. However, the extent to which these factors influence corticospinal and intracortical excitability of lower limb muscles is unknown. This study aimed to examine how variations in coil orientation and muscle activation affect corticospinal and intracortical excitability of tibialis anterior (TA), a lower leg muscle.

METHODS

In 21 young (21.6 ± 3.3 years, 11 female) adults, TMS was administered to the motor cortical representation of TA in posterior-anterior (PA) and mediolateral (ML) orientations at rest and during muscle activation. Single-pulse TMS measures of motor evoked potential amplitude, in addition to resting and active motor thresholds, were used to index corticospinal excitability, whereas paired-pulse TMS measures of short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and facilitation (SICF), and long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI), were used to assess excitability of intracortical circuits.

RESULTS

For single-pulse TMS, motor thresholds and test TMS intensity were lower for ML stimulation (all P < 0.05). In a resting muscle, ML TMS produced greater SICI (P < 0.001) and less SICF (both P < 0.05) when compared with PA TMS. In contrast, ML TMS in an active muscle resulted in reduced SICI but increased SICF (both P ≤ 0.001) when compared with PA TMS.

CONCLUSION

TMS coil orientation and muscle activation influence measurements of intracortical excitability recorded in the tibialis anterior, and are therefore important considerations in TMS studies of lower limb muscles.

Visuomotor task acquisition is reduced by priming paired associative stimulation in older adults

Transcranial magnetic stimulation may represent an effective means for improving motor function in the elderly. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate the effects of paired associative stimulation (PAS; a plasticity-inducing transcranial magnetic stimulation paradigm) on acquisition of a novel visuomotor task in young and older adults. Fourteen young (20.4 ± 0.6 years) and 13 older (69.0 ± 1.6 years) adults participated in 3 experimental sessions during which training was preceded (primed) by PAS. Within each session, the interstimulus interval used for PAS was set at either the N20 latency plus 5 ms (PAS_LTP), the N20 latency minus 10 ms (PAS_LTD), or a constant 100 ms (PAS_Control). After training, the level of motor skill was not different between PAS conditions in young subjects (all p-values > 0.2), but was reduced by both PAS_LTP (p = 0.02) and PAS_LTD (p = 0.0001) in older subjects. Consequently, priming PAS was detrimental to skill acquisition in older adults, possibly suggesting a need for interventions that are optimized for use in elderly populations.