Facilitatory effect on the motor cortex by electrical stimulation over the cerebellum in humans.

Electrical stimulation over the cerebellum is known to transiently suppress the contralateral motor cortex in humans. However, projections from the cerebellar nuclei to the primary motor cortex are disynaptic excitatory pathways through the ventral thalamus. In the present investigation we studied facilitatory effects on the motor cortical excitability elicited by electrical stimulation over the cerebellum by recording surface electromyographic (EMG) responses from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle in nine normal volunteers. For primary motor cortical activation magnetic stimuli were given over the contralateral hand motor area with a figure-of-eight shaped coil with a current to preferentially elicit I3-waves (test stimulus). For cerebellar stimulation high-voltage electric stimuli were given with an anode on the ipsilateral mastoid process and a cathode over the contralateral process as previously described (conditioning stimulus). The effect of conditioning-test interstimulus intervals was investigated. Anodal cerebellar stimuli increased the size of EMG responses to magnetic cortical stimulation at an interstimulus interval of 3 ms. Reversing the current of conditioning stimulus abolished the facilitation. The same (anodal) conditioning stimuli did not affect electrically evoked cortical responses. Based on the effective polarity of the conditioning stimulus and the time course of facilitation we consider that this effect is due to motor cortical facilitation elicited by activation of the excitatory dentatothalamocortical pathway at the deep cerebellar nuclei or superior cerebellar peduncle. We conclude that the motor cortical facilitation is evoked by cerebellar stimulation in humans.

Further evidence to support different mechanisms underlying intracortical inhibition of the motor cortex.

Paired-pulse magnetic stimulation has been widely used to study intracortical inhibition of the motor cortex. Inhibition at interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of 1-5 ms is ascribed to a GABAergic inhibitory system in the motor cortex. However, Fisher et al. have proposed that different mechanisms are operating at an ISI of 1 ms and 2.5 ms. In order to confirm their concept and clarify whether inhibition at all these intervals is produced by a single mechanism, we compared effects of paired-pulse stimulation at ISIs of 1 ms, 2 ms, and 3-5 ms. We evaluated how intracortical inhibition affected the I3-wave, I1-wave, magnetic D-wave, and anodal D-wave components of electromyographic (EMG) responses using previously reported methods. The data suggest that three separate effects occur within these ISIs. At ISIs of 3-5 ms, inhibition was evoked only in responses to I3-waves, whereas no inhibition was elicited in responses to I1-waves or magnetic D-waves. In contrast, at an ISI of 1 ms, responses to I3-waves and I1-waves were moderately suppressed. Moreover, even magnetic D-waves were slightly suppressed, whereas anodal D-waves were unaffected. At an ISI of 2 ms, none of the descending volleys were inhibited. We propose that we should use ISIs of 3-5 ms for estimating function of the GABAergic inhibitory system of the motor cortex by paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Our results support the idea of Fisher et al. that the mechanism responsible for the inhibition at an ISI of 1 ms is not the same as that responsible for suppression at ISIs of 3-5 ms (GABAergic inhibitory circuits in the motor cortex). At an ISI of 2 ms, we suggest that the inhibitory influence evoked by the first stimulus (S1) should collide with or be occluded by the second stimulus (S2), which leads to the lack of inhibition when the subjects make a voluntary contraction of the target muscle.

Functional connectivity revealed by single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) during repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the motor cortex.

OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we studied effects of 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the left primary motor cortex (M1) on regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) using single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). METHODS: SPECT measurements were carried out under two experimental conditions: real and sham stimulation. In sham stimulation, to exclude other components besides currents in the brain in rTMS, we applied sound and electrical stimulation to the skin of the head. 99mTc-ethyl cysteinate dimer was injected during the real or sham stimulation. Images were analyzed with the statistical parametric mapping software (SPM99). Relative differences in adjusted rCBF between two conditions were determined by a voxel-by-voxel paired t test. RESULTS: 1 Hz rTMS at an intensity of 1.1 x active motor threshold evoked increase of rCBF in the contralateral (right) cerebellar hemisphere. Reduction of rCBF was observed in the contralateral M1, superior parietal lobule (most probably corresponding to PE area in the monkey) (Rizzolatti G, Luppino G, Matelli M. Electroenceph clin Neurophysiol 1998;106:283-296), inferior parietal lobule (PF area in the monkey (Rizzolatti et al., 1998)), dorsal and ventral premotor areas (dPM, vPM) and supplementary motor area (SMA). CONCLUSIONS: Increase of rCBF in the contralateral cerebellum must reflect facilitatory connection between the motor cortex and contralateral cerebellum. Reduced rCBF in the contralateral M1 may be produced by transcallosal inhibitory effect of the left motor cortical activation. CBF decrease in the right PM, SMA and parietal cortex may reflect some secondary effects. Low frequency rTMS at an intensity of around threshold for active muscles can evoke rCBF changes. SIGNIFICANCE: We demonstrated that rCBF changes could be elicited even by low frequency rTMS at such a low intensity as the threshold for an active muscle. Combination of rTMS and SPECT is one of powerful tools to study interareal connection within the human brain.

Remote effects of self-paced teeth clenching on the excitability of hand motor area.

We studied remote effects of teeth clenching on motor cortical and spinal cord excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), brainstem electrical stimulation (BES), and ulnar nerve stimulation (F-wave) in eight normal volunteers. The TMS, BES, and ulnar nerve stimulation at the wrist were given at different intervals (0-200 ms) after the onset of masseter contraction. Surface electromyographic responses were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle. Responses at different intervals were compared with the response elicited when the subject made no teeth clenching (control response). In TMS, conditioned responses (during teeth clenching) were significantly larger than the control at all intervals. In contrast, in BES and F-waves, conditioned responses were not larger than the control at an early phase (intervals shorter than 50 ms), whereas they were larger than the control at later intervals (longer than 50 ms). These results suggest that facilitation occurs in the hand motor area at the early phase of teeth clenching, and spinal facilitation dominates at its late phase. This time course of facilitation may indicate that the motor cortex must regulate hand muscles finely at the early phase of teeth clenching, and spinal cord may stabilize them firmly at the late phase. The excitability changes of the hand motor area may be in parallel with that of the masseter motor area which reflects the pattern of masseter contraction when the subject activates the masseter muscle phasically at the early phase and sustains that contraction at the late phase.

Mechanisms of intracortical I-wave facilitation elicited with paired-pulse magnetic stimulation in humans.

In order to elucidate the mechanisms underlying intracortical I-wave facilitation elicited by paired-pulse magnetic stimulation, we compared intracortical facilitation of I1-waves with that of I3-waves using single motor unit and surface electromyographic (EMG) recordings from the first dorsal interosseous muscle (FDI). We used a suprathreshold first stimulus (S1) and a subthreshold second stimulus (S2). In most experiments, both stimuli induced currents in the same direction. In others, S1 induced posteriorly directed currents and S2 induced anteriorly directed currents. When both stimuli induced anteriorly directed currents (I1-wave effects), an interstimulus interval (ISI) of 1.5 ms resulted in extra facilitation of the responses to S1 alone. The latency of this effect was equivalent to that of the I2-wave from S1. When S1 evoked posteriorly directed currents (I3-wave recruitment), facilitation occurred at a latency corresponding to the I3-wave from S1. This facilitation occurred at an ISI of 1.5 ms when both S1 and S2 flowed posteriorly, and at an ISI of approximately 3.5 ms when S1 was posteriorly and S2 was anteriorly directed. Based on these findings, we propose the following mechanisms for intracortical I-wave facilitation. When S1 and S2 induce currents in the same direction, facilitation is produced by summation between excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) elicited by S1 and subliminal depolarization of interneurones elicited by S2 directly. When S1 and S2 induce currents in the opposite direction, facilitation is produced by the same mechanism as above or by temporal and spatial summation of EPSPs elicited by two successive stimuli at interneurones or corticospinal neurones of the motor cortex.