Transcranial magnetic stimulation with a half-sine wave pulse elicits direction-specific effects in human motor cortex

BMC Neuroscience

Volker Mall⁴  Hartwig R Siebner³  Norbert Gattinger²  Bernhard Gleich²  Astrid Pechmann⁴  Igor Delvendahl¹  Nikolai H Jung⁴ 

[1] European Neuroscience Institute Göttingen, Grisebachstr 5, Göttingen, 37077, Germany;Central Institute for Medical Engineering at Technische Universität München (IMETUM), Boltzmannstrasse 11, Garching, 85748, Germany;Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegaard Allé 30, Hvidovre, 2650, Denmark;Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Division of Neuropaediatrics and Muscular Disorders, University Medical Centre Freiburg, Mathildenstr 1, Freiburg, 79106, Germany

关键词: Motor cortex;    Stimulus–response curves;    I-waves;    Half-sine stimulus;    Current direction;    Transcranial magnetic stimulation;   

Others  :  1140794
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2202-13-139

 received in 2012-08-23, accepted in 2012-10-27,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) commonly uses so-called monophasic pulses where the initial rapidly changing current flow is followed by a critically dampened return current. It has been shown that a monophasic TMS pulse preferentially excites different cortical circuits in the human motor hand area (M1-HAND), if the induced tissue current has a posterior-to-anterior (PA) or anterior-to-posterior (AP) direction. Here we tested whether similar direction-specific effects could be elicited in M1-HAND using TMS pulses with a half-sine wave configuration.

Results

In 10 young participants, we applied half-sine pulses to the right M1-HAND which elicited PA or AP currents with respect to the orientation of the central sulcus.

Measurements of the motor evoked potential (MEP) revealed that PA half-sine stimulation resulted in lower resting motor threshold (RMT) than AP stimulation. When stimulus intensity (SI) was gradually increased as percentage of maximal stimulator output, the stimulus–response curve (SRC) of MEP amplitude showed a leftward shift for PA as opposed to AP half-sine stimulation. Further, MEP latencies were approximately 1 ms shorter for PA relative to AP half-sine stimulation across the entire SI range tested. When adjusting SI to the respective RMT of PA and AP stimulation, the direction-specific differences in MEP latencies persisted, while the gain function of MEP amplitudes was comparable for PA and AP stimulation.

Conclusions

Using half-sine pulse configuration, single-pulse TMS elicits consistent direction-specific effects in M1-HAND that are similar to TMS with monophasic pulses. The longer MEP latency for AP half-sine stimulation suggests that PA and AP half-sine stimulation preferentially activates different sets of cortical neurons that are involved in the generation of different corticospinal descending volleys.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Jung et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Amassian VE, Stewart M, Quirk GJ, Rosenthal JL: Physiological basis of motor effects of a transient stimulus to cerebral cortex. Neurosurgery 1987, 20:74-93.
• [2]DiLazzaro V, Profice P, Ranieri F, Capone F, Dileone M, Oliviero A, Pilato F: I-wave origin and modulation. Brain Stimul 2011, 5(4):512-525.
• [3]DiLazzaro V, Profice P, Pilato F, Dileone M, Oliviero A, Ziemann U: The effects of motor cortex rTMS on corticospinal descending activity. Clin Neurophysiol 2010, 121:464-473.
• [4]Patton HD, Amassian VE: Single and multiple-unit analysis of cortical stage of pyramidal tract activation. J Neurophysiol 1954, 17:345-363.
• [5]DiLazzaro V, Oliviero A, Saturno E, Pilato F, Insola A, Mazzone P, Profice P, Tonali P, Rothwell JC: The effect on corticospinal volleys of reversing the direction of current induced in the motor cortex by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Exp Brain Res 2001, 138:268-273.
• [6]Sakai K, Ugawa Y, Terao Y, Hanajima R, Furubayashi T, Kanazawa I: Preferential activation of different I waves by transcranial magnetic stimulation with a figure-of-eight-shaped coil. Exp Brain Res 1997, 113:24-32.
• [7]Werhahn KJ, Fong JK, Meyer BU, Priori A, Rothwell JC, Day BL, Thompson PD: The effect of magnetic coil orientation on the latency of surface EMG and single motor unit responses in the first dorsal interosseous muscle. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1994, 93:138-146.
• [8]DiLazzaro V, Oliviero A, Mazzone P, Insola A, Pilato F, Saturno E, Accurso A, Tonali P, Rothwell JC: Comparison of descending volleys evoked by monophasic and biphasic magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex in conscious humans. Exp Brain Res 2001, 141:121-127.
• [9]Groppa S, Oliviero A, Eisen A, Quartarone A, Cohen LG, Mall V, Kaelin-Lang A, Mima T, Rossi S, Thickbroom GW, et al.: A practical guide to diagnostic transcranial magnetic stimulation: report of an IFCN committee. Clin Neurophysiol 2012, 123:858-882.
• [10]Terao Y, Ugawa Y, Hanajima R, Machii K, Furubayashi T, Mochizuki H, Enomoto H, Shiio Y, Uesugi H, Iwata NK, Kanazawa I: Predominant activation of I1-waves from the leg motor area by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Brain Res 2000, 859(1):137-146.
• [11]Kammer T, Beck S, Thielscher A, Laubis-Herrmann U, Topka H: Motor thresholds in humans: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study comparing different pulse waveforms, current directions and stimulator types. Clin Neurophysiol 2001, 112:250-258.
• [12]Weyh T, Wendicke K, Mentschel C, Zantow H, Siebner HR: Marked differences in the thermal characteristics of figure-of-eight shaped coils used for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 2005, 116:1477-1486.
• [13]Sommer M, Alfaro A, Rummel M, Speck S, Lang N, Tings T, Paulus W: Half sine, monophasic and biphasic transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human motor cortex. Clin Neurophysiol 2006, 117:838-844.
• [14]Ziemann U, Lonnecker S, Steinhoff BJ, Paulus W: Effects of antiepileptic drugs on motor cortex excitability in humans: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Ann Neurol 1996, 40:367-378.
• [15]Brasil-Neto JP, Cohen LG, Panizza M, Nilsson J, Roth BJ, Hallett M: Optimal focal transcranial magnetic activation of the human motor cortex: effects of coil orientation, shape of the induced current pulse, and stimulus intensity. J Clin Neurophysiol 1992, 9:132-136.
• [16]Claus D, Murray NM, Spitzer A, Flugel D: The influence of stimulus type on the magnetic excitation of nerve structures. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1990, 75:342-349.
• [17]Salvador R, Silva S, Basser PJ, Miranda PC: Determining which mechanisms lead to activation in the motor cortex: a modeling study of transcranial magnetic stimulation using realistic stimulus waveforms and sulcal geometry. Clin Neurophysiol 2011, 122:748-758.
• [18]Rossini PM, Barker AT, Berardelli A, Caramia MD, Caruso G, Cracco RQ, Dimitrijevic MR, Hallett M, Katayama Y, Lucking CH, et al.: Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application. Report of an IFCN committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1994, 91:79-92.
• [19]Chen R, Yung D, Li JY: Organization of ipsilateral excitatory and inhibitory pathways in the human motor cortex. J Neurophysiol 2003, 89:1256-1264.
• [20]Hallett M, Chen R, Ziemann U, Cohen LG: Reorganization in motor cortex in amputees and in normal volunteers after ischemic limb deafferentation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl 1999, 51:183-187.
• [21]Ni Z, Charab S, Gunraj C, Nelson AJ, Udupa K, Yeh IJ, Chen R: Transcranial magnetic stimulation in different current directions activates separate cortical circuits. J Neurophysiol 2011, 105:749-756.
• [22]Kujirai K, Kujirai T, Sinkjaer T, Rothwell JC: Associative plasticity in human motor cortex during voluntary muscle contraction. J Neurophysiol 2006, 96:1337-1346.
• [23]Rothkegel H, Sommer M, Paulus W: Breaks during 5Hz rTMS are essential for facilitatory after effects. Clin Neurophysiol 2010, 121:426-430.
• [24]Hanajima R, Ugawa Y, Terao Y, Enomoto H, Shiio Y, Mochizuki H, Furubayashi T, Uesugi H, Iwata NK, Kanazawa I: Mechanisms of intracortical I-wave facilitation elicited with paired-pulse magnetic stimulation in humans. J Physiol 2002, 538:253-261.
• [25]Hanajima R, Terao Y, Shirota Y, Ohminami S, Nakatani-Enomoto S, Okabe S, Matsumoto H, Tsutsumi R, Ugawa Y: Short-interval intracortical inhibition in Parkinson's disease using anterior-posterior directed currents. Exp Brain Res 2011, 214:317-321.
• [26]Orth M, Rothwell JC: The cortical silent period: intrinsic variability and relation to the waveform of the transcranial magnetic stimulation pulse. Clin Neurophysiol 2004, 115:1076-1082.
• [27]Trompetto C, Assini A, Buccolieri A, Marchese R, Abbruzzese G: Intracortical inhibition after paired transcranial magnetic stimulation depends on the current flow direction. Clin Neurophysiol 1999, 110:1106-1110.
• [28]Hamada M, Murase N, Hasan A: Balaratnam M. The Role of Interneuron Networks in Driving Human Motor Cortical Plasticity. Cereb Cortex, Rothwell JC; 2012.
• [29]Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A: Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol 2009, 120:2008-2039.
• [30]DiLazzaro V, Pilato F, Dileone M, Profice P, Oliviero A, Mazzone P, Insola A, Ranieri F, Meglio M, Tonali PA, et al.: The physiological basis of the effects of intermittent theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex. J Physiol 2008, 586:3871-3879.
• [31]Awiszus F: TMS and threshold hunting. Suppl Clin Neurophysiol 2003, 56:13-23.
• [32]Awiszus F, Feistner H: Rapid on-line estimation of responses to transcranial magnetic and peripheral nerve electrical stimulation in single human motoneurons. J Neurosci Methods 1995, 61:91-97.
• [33]Moller C, Arai N, Lucke J, Ziemann U: Hysteresis effects on the input–output curve of motor evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2009, 120:1003-1008.
• [34]Rossini PM, Desiato MT, Lavaroni F, Caramia MD: Brain excitability and electroencephalographic activation: non-invasive evaluation in healthy humans via transcranial magnetic stimulation. Brain Res 1991, 567:111-119.