| Literature DB >> 27445758 |
Olivia Lhomond1, Normand Teasdale2, Martin Simoneau2, Laurence Mouchnino1.
Abstract
Previous studies on the control of human balance suggested that increased pressure under the feet, leading to reduced plantar sole mechanoreceptors sensitivity, increases body sway. Although this suggestion is attracting, it is unclear whether increased plantar sole pressure simply reduces the transmission of plantar sole afferent to the cortex or also alters the sensorimotor integrative mechanisms. Here we used electrical stimulation applied under the sole of the foot to probe the sensorimotor mechanisms processing foot mechanoreceptors. Balance control of healthy individuals was assessed either when wearing a loaded vest or in normal-weight condition. In the Loaded condition, we observed decreased cortical activity over the primary somatosensory cortex (SI) for both an early P50-N90 somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) and for oscillatory brain activity within the gamma band (30-80 Hz). These reductions were interpreted as a disrupted early sensory transmission (i.e., decreased early SEP) leading to a decreased perception of plantar sole sensory information (i.e., decreased gamma band power). These early sensory mechanisms for the Loaded condition were associated with an increase in the late P170-N210 SEP and oscillatory brain activity within the beta band (19-24 Hz). These neural signatures involved areas which are engaged in sensorimotor integrative processes (secondary somatosensory cortex (SII) and right temporoparietal junction). Altered early and late sensory processes may result from the increase pressure on the mechanoreceptors of the foot sole and not from postural instability per se. Indeed, postural instability with normal weight condition did not lead to SEP changes.Entities:
Keywords: EEG; plantar sole afferents; standing balance
Year: 2016 PMID: 27445758 PMCID: PMC4925671 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00318
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.169
Figure 1Somatosensory evoked potential (SEP). (A) Experimental set up. Insert depicts the workout vest worn by the participants; the added weight was distributed on the front and back of this vest. Position of the stimulation electrodes underneath the left foot and time-intervals between stimulations. (B) Mean integral of the horizontal forces in all directions (error bars are standard deviation across participants) ***p < 0.001. (C) Grand average SEP for all participants recorded at Cz in both conditions (Control and Loaded). Dashed line indicates the moment of the stimulation. (D) Mean for the 60 stimulations of the early and late SEPs amplitudes (error bars are standard deviation across participants) ***p < 0.001 and *p < 0.05. Note that the grand average SEP traces at electrode Cz (B) was not representative of the mean value computed for each participant (C).
Quantifications of the early and late EEG SEPs (mean and standard deviation) in all conditions of the Standing task (NA, non applicable).
| Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Loaded | Feet apart No stimulation | Feet apart | Feet close | |
| P50 latency | 48 ms ± 11 | 53 ms ± 11 | NA | 57 ms ± 7 | 63 ms ± 19 |
| P50-N90 amplitude | 3.2 μV ± 1.6 | 2.4 μV ± 1.1 | NA | 2.7 μV ± 1 | 2.8 μV ± 1.4 |
| P170 latency | 168 ms ± 40 | 174 ms ± 38 | NA | 188 ms ± 21 | 183 ms ± 38 |
| P170-N210 amplitude | 1.46 μV ± 0.8 | 2 μV ± 1.1 | NA | 1.3 μV ± 0.9 | 1.28 μV ± 0.8 |
Figure 2Source localization. (A) Topographic maps low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (LORETA) computed from all participants’ grand average of the waves (monopolar recordings). The maps are shown for the Loaded and Control conditions at the late P170-N210 SEP complex latency. (B) The curves (right scale) depict the mean activity of the region of interest (ROI) for all participants (n = 16) from stimulus to 305 ms post-stimulus. The histograms (left scale) represent the mean ROI activity within each of the three 60 ms-epochs (error bars are standard deviation across participants).
Figure 3Frequency-specificity of brain oscillations. (A) Time-frequency power of the signals by means of a complex Morlet’s wavelet transform applied on the average SEP for each participant, then averaged across participants. Evoked gamma activity is strictly phase-locked to the electrical stimulus. The mean Cz SEP curves were superimposed on time frequency analyses for comparison. Dashed line indicates the moment of the stimulation in the “Loaded minus Control” panel. (B) Source localization of beta (20 Hz) frequency band oscillations (right panel). In contrast to primary somatosensory cortex (SI; left panel, top view), secondary somatosensory cortex (SII) showed bilateral activation even with unilateral peripheral activation likely due both to parallel thalamic projections and to serial activation via cortico-cortical and transcallosal fibers (Eickhoff et al., 2007). In the bottom view, the temporal lobes were removed by tranparency artifact for display purposes. The evoked stimulation in the SI showing a lateralized activation at the N90 latency response was included to assess the effectiveness and specificity of applied unilateral left foot stimulation (left panel).