Literature DB >> 23756177

A comparison of neuroplastic responses to non-invasive brain stimulation protocols and motor learning in healthy adults.

Ann-Maree Vallence1, Lisa Kurylowicz, Michael C Ridding.   

Abstract

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NBS) techniques can induce neuroplastic changes similar to those associated with motor learning and there is evidence for the involvement of common mechanisms. Whether there are correlations between the changes induced by NBS and those associated with motor learning remains unclear. We investigated whether there was any relationship between an individual's neuroplastic responses to several different NBS protocols (continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS); intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS); facilitatory paired associative stimulation (PAS: inter-stimulus interval 25ms)) and whether these responses correlated with the neuroplastic response associated with a motor training (MT) task involving repeated fast-as-possible thumb abductions. Changes in motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude were used to assess the neuroplastic response to each protocol. MEP amplitude decreased significantly following cTBS, however there was no significant change in MEP amplitude following iTBS, PAS or MT. There were no significant correlations between individuals' neuroplastic responses to any of the NBS protocols tested or between individuals' neuroplastic responses to the NBS protocols and motor learning. These results provide no support for an association between individuals' neuroplastic responses to several plasticity-inducing protocols. Although there is evidence for involvement of common mechanisms in the neuroplastic changes induced by NBS and motor learning, the results of this study suggest (1) the mechanisms mediating TBS-, PAS-, and MT-induced plasticity may only partially overlap, and (2) additional factors, including large intra and inter-subject response variability, may make the demonstration of associations between neuroplastic responses to the various protocols difficult.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Motor training; Neuroplasticity; Paired-associative stimulation; Primary motor cortex; Response variability; Theta-burst stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23756177     DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2013.05.064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosci Lett        ISSN: 0304-3940            Impact factor:   3.046


  14 in total

1.  Noninvasive brain stimulation can elucidate and interact with the mechanisms underlying motor learning and retention: implications for rehabilitation.

Authors:  Mark R Hinder; Paola Reissig; Hakuei Fujiyama
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Improving motor performance without training: the effect of combining mirror visual feedback with transcranial direct current stimulation.

Authors:  Erik von Rein; Maike Hoff; Elisabeth Kaminski; Bernhard Sehm; Christopher J Steele; Arno Villringer; Patrick Ragert
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Skill acquisition is enhanced by reducing trial-to-trial repetition.

Authors:  Lore W E Vleugels; Stephan P Swinnen; Robert M Hardwick
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Facilitatory non-invasive brain stimulation in older adults: the effect of stimulation type and duration on the induction of motor cortex plasticity.

Authors:  Rohan Puri; Mark R Hinder; Alison J Canty; Jeffery J Summers
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-07-23       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Motor Cortex Excitability Reflects the Subjective Value of Reward and Mediates Its Effects on Incentive-Motivated Performance.

Authors:  Joseph K Galaro; Pablo Celnik; Vikram S Chib
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Plasticity Induced by Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation in Bilateral Motor Cortices Is Not Altered in Older Adults.

Authors:  Daina S E Dickins; Martin V Sale; Marc R Kamke
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 3.599

7.  Short-latency afferent inhibition is a poor predictor of individual susceptibility to rTMS-induced plasticity in the motor cortex of young and older adults.

Authors:  Marielle Young-Bernier; Annick N Tanguay; Patrick S R Davidson; François Tremblay
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 5.750

8.  Efficacy and interindividual variability in motor-cortex plasticity following anodal tDCS and paired-associative stimulation.

Authors:  Wolfgang Strube; Tilmann Bunse; Berend Malchow; Alkomiet Hasan
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2015-03-17       Impact factor: 3.599

9.  Cortical Excitability, Synaptic Plasticity, and Cognition in Benign Epilepsy With Centrotemporal Spikes: A Pilot TMS-EMG-EEG Study.

Authors:  Fiona M Baumer; Kristina Pfeifer; Adam Fogarty; Dalia Pena-Solorzano; Camarin E Rolle; Joanna L Wallace; Alexander Rotenberg; Robert S Fisher
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 2.590

10.  Comparing the efficacy of excitatory transcranial stimulation methods measuring motor evoked potentials.

Authors:  Vera Moliadze; Georg Fritzsche; Andrea Antal
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 3.599

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.