Literature DB >> 27006636

Theta-burst Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Alters the Functional Topography of the Cortical Motor Network.

Nor Azila Noh1, Giorgio Fuggetta2, Paolo Manganotti3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive tool that is able to modulate the electrical activity of the brain depending upon its protocol of stimulation. Theta burst stimulation (TBS) is a high-frequency TMS protocol that is able to induce prolonged plasticity changes in the brain. The induction of plasticity-like effects by TBS is useful in both experimental and therapeutic settings; however, the underlying neural mechanisms of this modulation remain unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of continuous TBS (cTBS) on the intrahemispheric and interhemispheric functional connectivity of the resting and active brain.
METHODS: A total of 26 healthy humans were randomly divided into two groups that received either real cTBS or sham (control) over the left primary motor cortex. Surface electroencephalogram (EEG) was used to quantify the changes of neural oscillations after cTBS at rest and after a choice reaction time test. The cTBS-induced EEG oscillations were computed using spectral analysis of event-related coherence (ERCoh) of theta (4-7.5 Hz), low alpha (8-9.5 Hz), high alpha (10-12.5 Hz), low beta (13-19.5 Hz), and high beta (20-30 Hz) brain rhythms.
RESULTS: We observed a global decrease in functional connectivity of the brain in the cTBS group when compared to sham in the low beta brain rhythm at rest and high beta brain rhythm during the active state. In particular, EEG spectral analysis revealed that high-frequency beta, a cortically generated brain rhythm, was the most sensitive band that was modulated by cTBS.
CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings suggest that cTBS, a TMS protocol that mimics the mechanism of long-term depression of synaptic plasticity, modulates motor network oscillations primarily at the cortical level and might interfere with cortical information coding.

Entities:  

Keywords:  electroencephalogram; long-term depression; motor cortex; neuromodulation; neuroplasticity

Year:  2015        PMID: 27006636      PMCID: PMC4795523     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Malays J Med Sci        ISSN: 1394-195X


  40 in total

1.  A comparison of two different continuous theta burst stimulation paradigms applied to the human primary motor cortex.

Authors:  Mitchell R Goldsworthy; Julia B Pitcher; Michael C Ridding
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  10/20, 10/10, and 10/5 systems revisited: their validity as relative head-surface-based positioning systems.

Authors:  Valer Jurcak; Daisuke Tsuzuki; Ippeita Dan
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-01-04       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Acute modulation of cortical oscillatory activities during short trains of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human motor cortex: a combined EEG and TMS study.

Authors:  Giorgio Fuggetta; Enea F Pavone; Antonio Fiaschi; Paolo Manganotti
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Modulation of cortical oscillatory activity during transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Debora Brignani; Paolo Manganotti; Paolo M Rossini; Carlo Miniussi
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 5.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation: a primer.

Authors:  Mark Hallett
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2007-07-19       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 6.  Mechanisms and applications of theta-burst rTMS on the human motor cortex.

Authors:  Lizbeth Cárdenas-Morales; Dennis A Nowak; Thomas Kammer; Robert C Wolf; Carlos Schönfeldt-Lecuona
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  2009-03-14       Impact factor: 3.020

7.  θ burst and conventional low-frequency rTMS differentially affect GABAergic neurotransmission in the rat cortex.

Authors:  Jörn Trippe; Annika Mix; Selcen Aydin-Abidin; Klaus Funke; Alia Benali
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Altered source-based EEG coherence of resting-state sensorimotor network in early-stage Alzheimer's disease compared to mild cognitive impairment.

Authors:  Fu-Jung Hsiao; Wei-Ta Chen; Yuh-Jen Wang; Sui-Hing Yan; Yung-Yang Lin
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  High- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation differentially activates c-Fos and zif268 protein expression in the rat brain.

Authors:  Selcen Aydin-Abidin; Jörn Trippe; Klaus Funke; Ulf T Eysel; Alia Benali
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 10.  Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research.

Authors:  Simone Rossi; Mark Hallett; Paolo M Rossini; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 3.708

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Exploring Cortical Plasticity and Oscillatory Brain Dynamics via Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Resting-State Electroencephalogram.

Authors:  Nor Azila Noh
Journal:  Malays J Med Sci       Date:  2016-06-30

2.  5 kHz Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation: Lack of Cortical Excitability Changes When Grouped in a Theta Burst Pattern.

Authors:  Patrik Kunz; Andrea Antal; Manuel Hewitt; Andreas Neef; Alexander Opitz; Walter Paulus
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 3.  Novel Neuromodulation Techniques to Assess Interhemispheric Communication in Neural Injury and Neurodegenerative Diseases.

Authors:  Samuel S Shin; Galit Pelled
Journal:  Front Neural Circuits       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.492

Review 4.  Changing Brain Networks Through Non-invasive Neuromodulation.

Authors:  Wing Ting To; Dirk De Ridder; John Hart; Sven Vanneste
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 3.169

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.