Literature DB >> 21389299

Cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation suppresses ipsilateral projections to presumed propriospinal neurons of the proximal upper limb.

Lynley V Bradnam1, Cathy M Stinear, Winston D Byblow.   

Abstract

This study investigated whether cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) of left primary motor cortex (M1) modulates excitability of ipsilateral propriospinal premotoneurons (PNs) in healthy humans. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the right motor cortex was used to obtain motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from the left biceps brachii (BB) while participants maintained contraction of the left BB. To examine presumed PN excitability, left BB MEPs were compared with those conditioned by median nerve stimulation (MNS) at the left elbow. Interstimulus intervals between TMS and MNS were set to produce summation at the C3-C4 level of the spinal cord. MNS facilitated BB MEPs elicited at TMS intensities near active motor threshold but inhibited BB MEPs at slightly higher intensities, indicative of putative PN modulation. c-tDCS suppressed the facilitatory and inhibitory effects of MNS. Sham tDCS did not alter either component. There was no effect of c-tDCS and sham tDCS on nonconditioned left BB MEPs or on the ipsilateral silent period of left BB. Right first dorsal interosseous MEPs were suppressed by c-tDCS. These results indicate that M1 c-tDCS can be used to modulate excitability of ipsilateral projections to presumed PNs controlling the proximal arm muscle BB. This technique may hold promise for promoting motor recovery of proximal upper limb function after stroke.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21389299     DOI: 10.1152/jn.01084.2010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  14 in total

1.  Neurophysiological and behavioural effects of dual-hemisphere transcranial direct current stimulation on the proximal upper limb.

Authors:  Alana B McCambridge; James W Stinear; Winston D Byblow
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-01-09       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Effects of a common transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocol on motor evoked potentials found to be highly variable within individuals over 9 testing sessions.

Authors:  Jared Cooney Horvath; Simon J Vogrin; Olivia Carter; Mark J Cook; Jason D Forte
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Interhemispheric asymmetry of the motor cortex excitability in stroke: relationship with sensory-motor impairment and injury chronicity.

Authors:  Marina Berenguer-Rocha; Adriana Baltar; Sérgio Rocha; Lívia Shirahige; Rodrigo Brito; Kátia Monte-Silva
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2020-04-07       Impact factor: 3.307

4.  Are ipsilateral motor evoked potentials subject to intracortical inhibition?

Authors:  Alana B McCambridge; James W Stinear; Winston D Byblow
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Ipsilateral motor pathways after stroke: implications for non-invasive brain stimulation.

Authors:  Lynley V Bradnam; Cathy M Stinear; Winston D Byblow
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Neuronal representation of stand and squat in the primary motor cortex of monkeys.

Authors:  Chaolin Ma; Xuan Ma; Hang Zhang; Jiang Xu; Jiping He
Journal:  Behav Brain Funct       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 3.759

7.  Transcranial direct current stimulation improves ipsilateral selective muscle activation in a frequency dependent manner.

Authors:  Kazumasa Uehara; James P Coxon; Winston D Byblow
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Transcranial direct current stimulation: five important issues we aren't discussing (but probably should be).

Authors:  Jared C Horvath; Olivia Carter; Jason D Forte
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2014-01-24

Review 9.  Studying the effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation in stroke recovery using magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Charlotte J Stagg; Heidi Johansen-Berg
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Gender Differences in Current Received during Transcranial Electrical Stimulation.

Authors:  Michael Russell; Theodore Goodman; Qiang Wang; Bennett Groshong; Bruce G Lyeth
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 4.157

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.