Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Spinal Cord Med ; 41(5): 503-517, 2018 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28784042

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine if pairing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with rehabilitation for two weeks could augment adaptive plasticity offered by these residual pathways to elicit longer-lasting improvements in motor function in incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI). DESIGN: Longitudinal, randomized, controlled, double-blinded cohort study. SETTING: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. PARTICIPANTS: Eight male subjects with chronic incomplete motor tetraplegia. INTERVENTIONS: Massed practice (MP) training with or without tDCS for 2 hrs, 5 times a week. OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed neurophysiologic and functional outcomes before, after and three months following intervention. Neurophysiologic measures were collected with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). TMS measures included excitability, representational volume, area and distribution of a weaker and stronger muscle motor map. Functional assessments included a manual muscle test (MMT), upper extremity motor score (UEMS), action research arm test (ARAT) and nine hole peg test (NHPT). RESULTS: We observed that subjects receiving training paired with tDCS had more increased strength of weak proximal (15% vs 10%), wrist (22% vs 10%) and hand (39% vs. 16%) muscles immediately and three months after intervention compared to the sham group. Our observed changes in muscle strength were related to decreases in strong muscle map volume (r=0.851), reduced weak muscle excitability (r=0.808), a more focused weak muscle motor map (r=0.675) and movement of weak muscle motor map (r=0.935). CONCLUSION: Overall, our results encourage the establishment of larger clinical trials to confirm the potential benefit of pairing tDCS with training to improve the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for individuals with SCI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01539109.


Subject(s)
Exercise Therapy/methods , Quadriplegia/therapy , Spinal Cord Injuries/therapy , Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motor Activity , Muscle Contraction , Neurological Rehabilitation/methods , Pilot Projects , Quadriplegia/rehabilitation , Recovery of Function , Spinal Cord Injuries/rehabilitation
2.
Clin Neurophysiol ; 128(6): 892-902, 2017 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28402865

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The standard approach to brain stimulation in stroke is based on the premise that ipsilesional M1 (iM1) is important for motor function of the paretic upper limb, while contralesional cortices compete with iM1. Therefore, the approach typically advocates facilitating iM1 and/or inhibiting contralesional M1 (cM1). But, this approach fails to elicit much improvement in severely affected patients, who on account of extensive damage to ipsilesional pathways, cannot rely on iM1. These patients are believed to instead rely on the undamaged cortices, especially the contralesional dorsal premotor cortex (cPMd), for support of function of the paretic limb. Here, we tested for the first time whether facilitation of cPMd could improve paretic limb function in severely affected patients, and if a cut-off could be identified to separate responders to cPMd from responders to the standard approach to stimulation. METHODS: In a randomized, sham-controlled crossover study, fifteen patients received the standard approach of stimulation involving inhibition of cM1 and a new approach involving facilitation of cPMd using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Patients also received rTMS to control areas. At baseline, impairment [Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer (UEFMPROXIMAL, max=36)] and damage to pathways [fractional anisotropy (FA)] was measured. We measured changes in time to perform proximal paretic limb reaching, and neurophysiology using TMS. RESULTS: Facilitation of cPMd generated more improvement in severely affected patients, who had experienced greater damage and impairment than a cut-off value of FA (0.5) and UEFMPROXIMAL (26-28). The standard approach instead generated more improvement in mildly affected patients. Responders to cPMd showed alleviation of interhemispheric competition imposed on iM1, while responders to the standard approach showed gains in ipsilesional excitability in association with improvement. CONCLUSIONS: A preliminary cut-off level of severity separated responders for standard approach vs. facilitation of cPMd. SIGNIFICANCE: Cut-offs identified here could help select candidates for tailored stimulation in future studies so patients in all ranges of severity could potentially achieve maximum benefit in function of the paretic upper limb.


Subject(s)
Brain Ischemia/therapy , Motor Cortex/physiopathology , Stroke/therapy , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation , Aged , Brain Ischemia/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Neurological , Neural Inhibition , Stroke/physiopathology , Upper Extremity/innervation , Upper Extremity/physiology
3.
Brain Connect ; 7(3): 182-196, 2017 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28142257

ABSTRACT

The pain matrix is comprised of an extensive network of brain structures involved in sensory and/or affective information processing. The thalamus is a key structure constituting the pain matrix. The thalamus serves as a relay center receiving information from multiple ascending pathways and relating information to and from multiple cortical areas. However, it is unknown how thalamocortical networks specific to sensory-affective information processing are functionally integrated. Here, in a proof-of-concept study in healthy humans, we aimed to understand this connectivity using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting primary motor (M1) or dorsolateral prefrontal cortices (DLPFC). We compared changes in functional connectivity (FC) with DLPFC tDCS to changes in FC with M1 tDCS. FC changes were also compared to further investigate its relation with individual's baseline experience of pain. We hypothesized that resting-state FC would change based on tDCS location and would represent known thalamocortical networks. Ten right-handed individuals received a single application of anodal tDCS (1 mA, 20 min) to right M1 and DLPFC in a single-blind, sham-controlled crossover study. FC changes were studied between ventroposterolateral (VPL), the sensory nucleus of thalamus, and cortical areas involved in sensory information processing and between medial dorsal (MD), the affective nucleus, and cortical areas involved in affective information processing. Individual's perception of pain at baseline was assessed using cutaneous heat pain stimuli. We found that anodal M1 tDCS and anodal DLPFC tDCS both increased FC between VPL and sensorimotor cortices, although FC effects were greater with M1 tDCS. Similarly, anodal M1 tDCS and anodal DLPFC tDCS both increased FC between MD and motor cortices, but only DLPFC tDCS modulated FC between MD and affective cortices, like DLPFC. Our findings suggest that M1 stimulation primarily modulates FC of sensory networks, whereas DLPFC stimulation modulates FC of both sensory and affective networks. Our findings when replicated in a larger group of individuals could provide useful evidence that may inform future studies on pain to differentiate between effects of M1 and DLPFC stimulation. Notably, our finding that individuals with high baseline pain thresholds experience greater FC changes with DLPFC tDCS implies the role of DLPFC in pain modulation, particularly pain tolerance.


Subject(s)
Motor Cortex/physiology , Neural Pathways/physiology , Pain Perception/physiology , Prefrontal Cortex/physiology , Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation , Adult , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Single-Blind Method
4.
Front Neurosci ; 10: 79, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27013942

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recruitment curves (RCs) acquired using transcranial magnetic stimulation are commonly used in stroke to study physiologic functioning of corticospinal tracts (CST) from M1. However, it is unclear whether CSTs from higher motor cortices contribute as well. OBJECTIVE: To explore whether integrity of CST from higher motor areas, besides M1, relates to CST functioning captured using RCs. METHODS: RCs were acquired for a paretic hand muscle in patients with chronic stroke. Metrics describing gain and overall output of CST were collected. CST integrity was defined by diffusion tensor imaging. For CST emerging from M1 and higher motor areas, integrity (fractional anisotropy) was evaluated in the region of the posterior limb of the internal capsule, the length of CST and in the region of the stroke lesion. RESULTS: We found that output and gain of RC was related to integrity along the length of CST emerging from higher motor cortices but not the M1. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that RC parameters in chronic stroke infer function primarily of CST descending from the higher motor areas but not M1. RCs may thus serve as a simple, in-expensive means to assess re-mapping of alternate areas that is generally studied with resource-intensive neuroimaging in stroke.

5.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol ; 25(5): 754-64, 2015 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26111434

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Reproducibility of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) metrics is essential in accurately tracking recovery and disease. However, majority of evidence pertains to reproducibility of metrics for distal upper limb muscles. We investigate for the first time, reliability of corticospinal physiology for a large proximal muscle - the biceps brachii and relate how varying statistical analyses can influence interpretations. METHODS: 14 young right-handed healthy participants completed two sessions assessing resting motor threshold (RMT), motor evoked potentials (MEPs), motor map and intra-cortical inhibition (ICI) from the left biceps brachii. Analyses included paired t-tests, Pearson's, intra-class (ICC) and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Unlike paired t-tests, ICC, CCC and Pearson's were >0.6 indicating good reliability for RMTs, MEP intensities and locations of map; however values were <0.3 for MEP responses and ICI. CONCLUSIONS: Corticospinal physiology, defining excitability and output in terms of intensity of the TMS device, and spatial loci are the most reliable metrics for the biceps. MEPs and variables based on MEPs are less reliable since biceps receives fewer cortico-motor-neuronal projections. Statistical tests of agreement and associations are more powerful reliability indices than inferential tests. SIGNIFICANCE: Reliable metrics of proximal muscles when translated to a larger number of participants would serve to sensitively track and prognosticate function in neurological disorders such as stroke where proximal recovery precedes distal.


Subject(s)
Arm/physiology , Electromyography/methods , Muscle, Skeletal/physiology , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Adult , Electromyography/standards , Evoked Potentials, Motor , Female , Humans , Male , Reproducibility of Results , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/standards
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...