Accelerometry as a tool for measuring the effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation.

OBJECTIVE: We predicted that accelerometry would be a viable alternative to electromyography (EMG) for assessing fundamental Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) measurements (e.g. Resting Motor Threshold (RMT), recruitment curves, latencies). NEW METHOD: 21 participants were tested. TMS evoked responses were recorded with EMG on the First Dorsal Interosseus muscle and an accelerometer on the index fingertip. TMS was used to determine the (EMG-defined) RMT, then delivered at a range of intensities allowing determination of both the accelerometry-defined RMT and measurement of recruitment curves. RESULTS: RMT assessed by EMG was significantly lower than for accelerometry (t(19)=-3.84, p<.001, mean±SD EMG = 41.1±5.28% MSO (maximum stimulator output), Jerk = 44.55±5.82% MSO), though RMTs calculated for each technique were highly correlated (r(18)=.72, p<.001). EMG/Accelerometery recruitment curves were strongly correlated (r(14)=.98, p<.001), and Bayesian model comparison indicated they were equivalent (BF01>9). Latencies measured with EMG were lower and more consistent than those identified using accelerometry (χ2(1)=80.38, p<.001, mean±SD EMG=27.01±4.58 ms, Jerk=48.4±15.33 ms). COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: EMG is used as standard by research groups that study motor control and neurophysiology, but accelerometry has not yet been considered as a potential tool to assess measurements such as the overall magnitude and latency of the evoked response. CONCLUSIONS: While EMG provides more sensitive and reliable measurements of RMT and latency, accelerometry provides a reliable alternative to measure of the overall magnitude of TMS evoked responses.

Safety, tolerability and blinding efficiency of non-invasive deep transcranial temporal interference stimulation: first experience from more than 250 sessions.

Objective. Selective neuromodulation of deep brain regions has for a long time only been possible through invasive approaches, because of the steep depth-focality trade-off of conventional non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques.Approach. An approach that has recently emerged for deep NIBS in humans is transcranial Temporal Interference Stimulation (tTIS). However, a crucial aspect for its potential wide use is to ensure that it is tolerable, compatible with efficient blinding and safe.Main results. Here, we show the favorable tolerability and safety profiles and the robust blinding efficiency of deep tTIS targeting the striatum or hippocampus by leveraging a large dataset (119 participants, 257 sessions), including young and older adults and patients with traumatic brain injury. tTIS-evoked sensations were generally rated as 'mild', were equivalent in active and placebo tTIS conditions and did not enable participants to discern stimulation type.Significance. Overall, tTIS emerges as a promising tool for deep NIBS for robust double-blind, placebo-controlled designs.

Noninvasive theta-burst stimulation of the human striatum enhances striatal activity and motor skill learning.

The stimulation of deep brain structures has thus far only been possible with invasive methods. Transcranial electrical temporal interference stimulation (tTIS) is a novel, noninvasive technology that might overcome this limitation. The initial proof-of-concept was obtained through modeling, physics experiments and rodent models. Here we show successful noninvasive neuromodulation of the striatum via tTIS in humans using computational modeling, functional magnetic resonance imaging studies and behavioral evaluations. Theta-burst patterned striatal tTIS increased activity in the striatum and associated motor network. Furthermore, striatal tTIS enhanced motor performance, especially in healthy older participants as they have lower natural learning skills than younger subjects. These findings place tTIS as an exciting new method to target deep brain structures in humans noninvasively, thus enhancing our understanding of their functional role. Moreover, our results lay the groundwork for innovative, noninvasive treatment strategies for brain disorders in which deep striatal structures play key pathophysiological roles.

Connecting the dots: harnessing dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation to quantify the causal influence of medial frontal areas on the motor cortex.

Dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation has been widely employed to investigate the influence of cortical structures on the primary motor cortex. Here, we leveraged this technique to probe the causal influence of two key areas of the medial frontal cortex, namely the supplementary motor area and the medial orbitofrontal cortex, on primary motor cortex. We show that supplementary motor area stimulation facilitates primary motor cortex activity across short (6 and 8 ms) and long (12 ms) inter-stimulation intervals, putatively recruiting cortico-cortical and cortico-subcortico-cortical circuits, respectively. Crucially, magnetic resonance imaging revealed that this facilitatory effect depended on a key morphometric feature of supplementary motor area: individuals with larger supplementary motor area volumes exhibited more facilitation from supplementary motor area to primary motor cortex for both short and long inter-stimulation intervals. Notably, we also provide evidence that the facilitatory effect of supplementary motor area stimulation at short intervals is unlikely to arise from spinal interactions of volleys descending simultaneously from supplementary motor area and primary motor cortex. On the other hand, medial orbitofrontal cortex stimulation moderately suppressed primary motor cortex activity at both short and long intervals, irrespective of medial orbitofrontal cortex volume. These results suggest that dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation is a fruitful approach to investigate the differential influence of supplementary motor area and medial orbitofrontal cortex on primary motor cortex activity, paving the way for the multimodal assessment of these fronto-motor circuits in health and disease.

Reward timing matters in motor learning.

Reward timing, that is, the delay after which reward is delivered following an action is known to strongly influence reinforcement learning. Here, we asked if reward timing could also modulate how people learn and consolidate new motor skills. In 60 healthy participants, we found that delaying reward delivery by a few seconds influenced motor learning. Indeed, training with a short reward delay (1 s) induced continuous improvements in performance, whereas a long reward delay (6 s) led to initially high learning rates that were followed by an early plateau in the learning curve and a lower performance at the end of training. Participants who learned the skill with a long reward delay also exhibited reduced overnight memory consolidation. Overall, our data show that reward timing affects the dynamics and consolidation of motor learning, a finding that could be exploited in future rehabilitation programs.

An automatized method to determine latencies of motor-evoked potentials under physiological and pathophysiological conditions.

Background.Latencies of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) can provide insights into the motor neuronal pathways activated by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Notwithstanding its clinical relevance, accurate, unbiased methods to automatize latency detection are still missing.Objective.We present a novel open-source algorithm suitable for MEP onset/latency detection during resting state that only requires the post-stimulus electromyography signal and exploits the approximation of the first derivative of this signal to find the time point of initial deflection of the MEP.Approach.The algorithm has been benchmarked, using intra-class coefficient (ICC) and effect sizes, to manual detection of latencies done by three researchers independently on a dataset comprising almost 6500 MEP trials from healthy participants (n= 18) and stroke patients (n= 31) acquired during rest. The performance was further compared to currently available automatized methods, some of which created for active contraction protocols. Mainresults.The unstandardized effect size between the human raters and the present method is smaller than the sampling period for both healthy and pathological MEPs. Moreover, the ICC increases when the algorithm is added as a rater.Significance.The present algorithm is comparable to human expert decision and outperforms currently available methods. It provides a promising method for automated MEP latency detection under physiological and pathophysiological conditions.

Reward boosts reinforcement-based motor learning.

Besides relying heavily on sensory and reinforcement feedback, motor skill learning may also depend on the level of motivation experienced during training. Yet, how motivation by reward modulates motor learning remains unclear. In 90 healthy subjects, we investigated the net effect of motivation by reward on motor learning while controlling for the sensory and reinforcement feedback received by the participants. Reward improved motor skill learning beyond performance-based reinforcement feedback. Importantly, the beneficial effect of reward involved a specific potentiation of reinforcement-related adjustments in motor commands, which concerned primarily the most relevant motor component for task success and persisted on the following day in the absence of reward. We propose that the long-lasting effects of motivation on motor learning may entail a form of associative learning resulting from the repetitive pairing of the reinforcement feedback and reward during training, a mechanism that may be exploited in future rehabilitation protocols.

Motor training strengthens corticospinal suppression during movement preparation.

Training can improve motor skills and modify neural activity at rest and during movement execution. Learning-related modulations may also concern motor preparation but the neural correlates and the potential behavioral relevance of such adjustments remain unclear. In humans, preparatory processes have been largely investigated using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with several studies reporting decreased corticospinal excitability (CSE) relative to a baseline measure at rest; a phenomenon called preparatory suppression. Here, we investigated the effect of motor training on such preparatory suppression, in relation to resting CSE, in humans. We trained participants to initiate quick movements in an instructed-delay reaction time (RT) task and used TMS to investigate changes in CSE over the practice blocks. Training on the task speeded up RTs, with no repercussion on error rates. Training also increased resting CSE. Most interestingly, we found that CSE during action preparation did not mirror the training-related increase observed at rest. Rather, compared with the rising baseline, the degree of preparatory suppression strengthened with practice. This training-related change in preparatory suppression (but not the changes in baseline CSE) predicted RT gains: the subjects showing a greater strengthening of preparatory suppression were also those exhibiting larger gains in RTs. Finally, such a relationship between RTs and preparatory suppression was also evident at the single-trial level, though only in the nonselected effector: RTs were generally faster in trials where preparatory suppression was deeper. These findings suggest that training induces changes in motor preparatory processes that are linked to an enhanced ability to initiate fast movements.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Movement preparation involves a broad suppression in the excitability of the corticospinal pathway, a phenomenon called preparatory suppression. Here, we show that motor training strengthens preparatory suppression and that this strengthening is associated with faster reaction times. Our findings highlight a key role of preparatory suppression in training-driven behavioral improvements.

Advanced TMS approaches to probe corticospinal excitability during action preparation.

The motor system displays strong changes in neural activity during action preparation. In the past decades, several techniques, including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), have allowed us to gain insights into the functional role of such preparatory activity in humans. More recently, new TMS tools have been proposed to study the mechanistic principles underlying the changes in corticospinal excitability during action preparation. The aim of the present review is to provide a comprehensive description of these advanced methods and to discuss the new knowledge they give access to, relative to other existing approaches. We start with a brief synthesis of the work that has been achieved so far using classic TMS protocols during action preparation, such as the so-called single-pulse and paired-pulse techniques. We then highlight three new approaches that recently arose in the field of action preparation, including (1) the exploitation of TMS current direction, known as directional TMS, which enables investigating different subsets of neurons in the primary motor cortex, (2) the use of paired-pulse TMS to study the suppressive influence of the cerebellum on corticospinal excitability and (3) the development of a double-coil TMS approach, which facilitates the study of bilateral changes in corticospinal excitability. The aim of the present article is twofold: we seek to provide a comprehensive description of these advanced TMS tools and to discuss their bearings for the field of action preparation with respect to more traditional TMS approaches, as well as to neuroimaging techniques such as EEG or fMRI. Finally, we point out perspectives for fundamental and clinical research that arise from the combination of these methods, widening the horizon of possibilities for the investigation of the human motor system, both in health and disease.

Using a Double-Coil TMS Protocol to Assess Preparatory Inhibition Bilaterally.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied over the primary motor cortex (M1), elicits motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in contralateral limb muscles which are valuable indicators of corticospinal excitability (CSE) at the time of stimulation. So far, most studies have used single-coil TMS over one M1, yielding MEPs in muscles of a single limb-usually the hand. However, tracking CSE in the two hands simultaneously would be useful in many contexts. We recently showed that, in the resting state, double-coil stimulation of the two M1 with a 1 ms inter-pulse interval (double-coil1 ms TMS) elicits MEPs in both hands that are comparable to MEPs obtained using single-coil TMS. To further evaluate this new technique, we considered the MEPs elicited by double-coil1 ms TMS in an instructed-delay choice reaction time task where a prepared response has to be withheld until an imperative signal is displayed. Single-coil TMS studies have repetitively shown that in this type of task, the motor system is transiently inhibited during the delay period, as evident from the broad suppression of MEP amplitudes. Here, we aimed at investigating whether a comparable inhibitory effect can be observed with MEPs elicited using double-coil1 ms TMS. To do so, we compared the amplitude as well as the coefficient of variation (CV) of MEPs produced by double-coil1 ms or single-coil TMS during action preparation. We observed that MEPs were suppressed (smaller amplitude) and often less variable (smaller CV) during the delay period compared to baseline. Importantly, these effects were equivalent whether single-coil or double-coil1 ms TMS was used. This suggests that double-coil1 ms TMS is a reliable tool to assess CSE, not only when subjects are at rest, but also when they are involved in a task, opening new research horizons for scientists interested in the corticospinal correlates of human behavior.

Towards assessing corticospinal excitability bilaterally: Validation of a double-coil TMS method.

BACKGROUND: For several decades, Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been used to monitor corticospinal excitability (CSE) changes in various contexts. Habitually, single-coil TMS is applied over one primary motor cortex (M1), eliciting motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in a contralateral limb muscle, usually a hand effector. However, in many situations, it would be useful to obtain MEPs in both hands simultaneously, to track CSE bilaterally. Such an approach requires stimulating both M1 concurrently while avoiding interference between the two descending stimuli. NEW METHOD: We examined MEPs obtained at rest using a double-coil TMS approach where the two M1 are stimulated with a 1ms inter-pulse interval (double-coil1ms). MEPs were acquired using double-coil1ms (MEPdouble) or single-coil (MEPsingle) TMS, at five different intensities of stimulation (100, 115, 130, 145 or 160% of the resting motor threshold, rMT). Given the 1ms inter-pulse interval in double-coil1ms trials, MEPdouble were either evoked by a 1st (MEPdouble-1) or a 2nd (MEPdouble-2) TMS pulse. RESULTS: All MEPTYPE (MEPTYPE=MEPsingle, MEPdouble-1 and MEPdouble-2) were equivalent, regardless of the hand within which they were elicited, the intensity of stimulation or the pulse order. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD: This method allows one to observe state-related CSE changes for the two hands simultaneously on a trial-by-trial basis. CONCLUSION: These results infer the absence of any neural interactions between the two cortico-spinal volleys with double-coil1ms TMS. Hence, this technique can be reliably used to assess CSE bilaterally, opening new research perspectives for scientists interested in physiological markers of activity in the motor output system.

Learning stage-dependent effect of M1 disruption on value-based motor decisions.

The present study aimed at characterizing the impact of M1 disruption on the implementation of implicit value information in motor decisions, at both early stages (during reinforcement learning) and late stages (after consolidation) of action value encoding. Fifty subjects performed, over three consecutive days, a task that required them to select between two finger responses according to the color (instruction) and to the shape (implicit, undisclosed rule) of an imperative signal: considering the implicit rule in addition to the instruction allowed subjects to earn more money. We investigated the functional contribution of M1 to the implementation of the implicit rule in subjects' motor decisions. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) was applied over M1 either on Day 1 or on Day 3, producing a temporary lesion either during reinforcement learning (cTBSLearning group) or after consolidation of the implicit rule, during decision-making (cTBSDecision group), respectively. Interestingly, disrupting M1 activity on Day 1 improved the reliance on the implicit rule, plausibly because M1 cTBS increased dopamine release in the putamen in an indirect way. This finding corroborates the view that cTBS may affect activity in unstimulated areas, such as the basal ganglia. Notably, this effect was short-lasting; it did not persist overnight, suggesting that the functional integrity of M1 during learning is a prerequisite for the consolidation of implicit value information to occur. Besides, cTBS over M1 did not impact the use of the implicit rule when applied on Day 3, although it did so when applied on Day 2 in a recent study where the reliance on the implicit rule declined following cTBS (Derosiere et al., 2017). Overall, these findings indicate that the human M1 is functionally involved in the consolidation and implementation of implicit value information underlying motor decisions. However, M1 contribution seems to vanish as subjects become more experienced in using the implicit value information to make their motor decisions.