Literature DB >> 14755003

The sense of movement elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation in humans is due to sensory feedback.

P H Ellaway1, A Prochazka, M Chan, M J Gauthier.   

Abstract

It has been claimed that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the human motor cortex can produce a sense of movement of the contralateral hand, even when the hand is paralysed. The sense of movement was equated with a 'corollary discharge', a nulling mechanism originally posited for maintaining constancy of the visual field during eye movements. Our experiments were designed to test whether the sensation that accompanies TMS-evoked finger movements is generated centrally or whether it arises as a result of sensory feedback. Matched twitches of the left and right fingers were elicited either by bilateral electrical stimulation of forearm extensor muscles, or by a combination of TMS of left motor cortex (eliciting twitches of the right forefinger), and electrical stimulation of the left forearm muscles (eliciting twitches of the left forefinger). The time interval between stimuli activating left and right twitches was varied randomly (range +/- 90 ms) from trial to trial. Subjects reported whether they sensed that the left or the right movement occurred first, or if they could detect no difference. The left and right movements evoked by bilateral electrical stimulation of muscles were sensed as near simultaneous when there was zero delay between them. When TMS was applied in conjunction with unilateral muscle stimulation, the TMS-evoked movement was felt, on average, 20 ms after the movement evoked by muscle stimulation. Similar results were obtained when the skin under the cathodal electrodes was anaesthetized. Since the TMS-evoked movements were felt later rather than earlier than the electrically evoked movements, the results do not support the idea that the sensation of movement was elicited centrally by TMS. Rather, they favour sensory feedback as the source of the sense of movement. The earlier perception of electrically evoked versus TMS-evoked movements was probably due to earlier sensory responses in the periphery rather than a suppression of the excitability of somatosensory cortex.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14755003      PMCID: PMC1664943          DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.060483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Physiol        ISSN: 0022-3751            Impact factor:   5.182


  25 in total

1.  Excitation of the corticospinal tract by electromagnetic and electrical stimulation of the scalp in the macaque monkey.

Authors:  S A Edgley; J A Eyre; R N Lemon; S Miller
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Attenuation in detection of somatosensory stimuli by transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  L G Cohen; S Bandinelli; S Sato; C Kufta; M Hallett
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1991-10

3.  The effect of transcranial magnetic stimulation on median nerve somatosensory evoked potentials.

Authors:  T Kujirai; M Sato; J C Rothwell; L G Cohen
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1993-08

4.  Delay in the execution of voluntary movement by electrical or magnetic brain stimulation in intact man. Evidence for the storage of motor programs in the brain.

Authors:  B L Day; J C Rothwell; P D Thompson; A Maertens de Noordhout; K Nakashima; K Shannon; C D Marsden
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  A sense of movement elicited in paralyzed distal arm by focal magnetic coil stimulation of human motor cortex.

Authors:  V E Amassian; R Q Cracco; P J Maccabee
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1989-02-13       Impact factor: 3.252

6.  Direct comparison of corticospinal volleys in human subjects to transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation.

Authors:  D Burke; R Hicks; S C Gandevia; J Stephen; I Woodforth; M Crawford
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 5.182

7.  Motor reorganization after upper limb amputation in man. A study with focal magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  L G Cohen; S Bandinelli; T W Findley; M Hallett
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 13.501

8.  Leg paresthesias induced by magnetic brain stimulation in patients with thoracic spinal cord injury.

Authors:  L G Cohen; H Topka; R A Cole; M Hallett
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 9.910

9.  Focal magnetic coil stimulation reveals motor cortical system reorganized in humans after traumatic quadriplegia.

Authors:  W J Levy; V E Amassian; M Traad; J Cadwell
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1990-02-26       Impact factor: 3.252

10.  Rapid modulation of human cortical motor outputs following ischaemic nerve block.

Authors:  J P Brasil-Neto; J Valls-Solé; A Pascual-Leone; A Cammarota; V E Amassian; R Cracco; P Maccabee; J Cracco; M Hallett; L G Cohen
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  7 in total

1.  Corticospinal contribution to arm muscle activity during human walking.

Authors:  Dorothy Barthelemy; Jens Bo Nielsen
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Perception of non-voluntary brief contractions in normal subjects and in a deafferented patient.

Authors:  G Nicolas; V Marchand-Pauvert; V Lasserre; C Guihenneuc-Jovyaux; E Pierrot-Deseilligny; L Jami
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-11-13       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Illusory sensation of movement induced by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Mark Schram Christensen; Jesper Lundbye-Jensen; Michael James Grey; Alexandra Damgaard Vejlby; Bo Belhage; Jens Bo Nielsen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The spectral features of EEG responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex depend on the amplitude of the motor evoked potentials.

Authors:  Matteo Fecchio; Andrea Pigorini; Angela Comanducci; Simone Sarasso; Silvia Casarotto; Isabella Premoli; Chiara-Camilla Derchi; Alice Mazza; Simone Russo; Federico Resta; Fabio Ferrarelli; Maurizio Mariotti; Ulf Ziemann; Marcello Massimini; Mario Rosanova
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The role of the cerebellum in adaptation: ALE meta-analyses on sensory feedback error.

Authors:  Joseph F Johnson; Michel Belyk; Michael Schwartze; Ana P Pinheiro; Sonja A Kotz
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2019-06-02       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Motor Cortex Stimulation for Pain Relief: Do Corollary Discharges Play a Role?

Authors:  Joaquim P Brasil-Neto
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Pointing to One's Moving Hand: Putative Internal Models Do Not Contribute to Proprioceptive Acuity.

Authors:  Warren G Darling; Brian M Wall; Chris R Coffman; Charles Capaday
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 3.169

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.