| Literature DB >> 30949041 |
Jinbiao Liu1, Yixuan Sheng1, Honghai Liu1.
Abstract
Corticomuscular coherence (CMC) is an index utilized to indicate coherence between brain motor cortex and associated body muscles, conventionally. As an index of functional connections between the cortex and muscles, CMC research is the focus of neurophysiology in recent years. Although CMC has been extensively studied in healthy subjects and sports disorders, the purpose of its applications is still ambiguous, and the magnitude of CMC varies among individuals. Here, we aim to investigate factors that modulate the variation of CMC amplitude and compare significant CMC between these factors to find a well-developed research prospect. In the present review, we discuss the mechanism of CMC and propose a general definition of CMC. Factors affecting CMC are also summarized as follows: experimental design, band frequencies and force levels, age correlation, and difference between healthy controls and patients. In addition, we provide a detailed overview of the current CMC applications for various motor disorders. Further recognition of the factors affecting CMC amplitude can clarify the physiological mechanism and is beneficial to the implementation of CMC clinical methods.Entities:
Keywords: corticomuscular coherence; electroencephalogram; magnetoencephalography; stroke; surface electromyogram
Year: 2019 PMID: 30949041 PMCID: PMC6435838 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00100
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.169
FIGURE 1Schematic diagram of signal transmission in cerebral cortex and peripheral nerve.
FIGURE 2Primary brain regions. Motor cortex is the region in charge of planning, control and execution of voluntary movements. Sensory cortex arranges tactile representation from the toe to mouth. Cerebellum is mainly responsible for motion control. These three regions are more related to Corticomuscular coherence (CMC).
Different experimental design of CMC.
| Reference | Contraction form | Muscle position | Sample | CMC results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isometric | Agonist Antagonist | 21 right-footed men | CMC magnitude decreased more in antagonist than in agonist muscles as torque level increased. | |
| Isometric | Antagonist | 8 SCI patients 10 healthy participants | Magnitude of CMC and muscle co-activation decreased with the increase in the force level. | |
| Isometric | FPB FDMB | 15 healthy subjects | Greater β-band DTF was associated with high EMG stability levels and greater β-band CMC strength. | |
| Isometric | FDI SOL | 16 healthy young adults | A significant, positive correlation between recurrent inhibition and peak CMC across individuals. | |
| Isometric | Forearm flexors and extensors | 25 stroke patients23 healthy controls | Peak CMC in the contralesional hemisphere was found not only in some highly impaired patients, but also in some patients with good functional recovery. | |
| Isometric | Right EDC | 27 healthy subjects | CMC might represent a general marker of aging increased coherence amplitude might denote a compensatory mechanism to maintain isometric contraction. | |
| Isokinetic | TA | 14 SCI subjects15 healthy controls | Analysis of intramuscular TA coherence during isometric activation is related to muscle strength and gait function following incomplete SCI. | |
| Isotonic | FCR | 11 healthy subjects | The corticospinal tracks mainly mediate linear corticomuscular coupling, while non-linear coupling might relate to sensory feedback pathways. | |
Diverse force level and bands of CMC.
| Reference | Force level | Bands | Sample | Significant CMC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.96 N–3.92 N | Alpha/Theta | 9 healthy subjects | Yes | |
| 20% MVC | Alpha | 13 healthy subjects | Partially | |
| 20% MVC | Beta | 15 healthy subjects | Yes | |
| 30% MVC | Beta | 22 healthy subjects | Yes | |
| target 1: 0.5–0.9 N target 2: 1.1–1.5 N | Alpha/Gamma | 12 healthy subjects | No | |
| 20,40, 60, and 80% of rMVC | Beta | 10 ST subjects 11 ET subjects | CMC decreased | |
| 25 % MGF and 75 % MGF | Alpha/Beta/Gamma | 14 healthy subjects | Alpha/Beta increased Gamma decreased | |
| 4, 8, and 16% MVC | Beta | 8 healthy subjects | Yes | |
Health controls and patients of CMC.
| Reference | Type | Sample | CMC result |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEG-EMGEMG-EEG | 7 healthy controls5 stroke patients | Patients had lower CMC than healthy subjects | |
| EEG-EMG | 24 healthy controls19 SCA2 patients | Lower limbs CMC was significantly reduced in SCA2 patients as compared to healthy participants. | |
| EEG-EMG | 18 healthy controls18 essential tremor patients | CMC remained a relatively high level in healthy subjects. CMC level frequently dropped below the confidence level in patients. | |
| EEG-EMG | 15 healthy controls14 CP patients | CMC in gamma-band was lower in CP than in healthy controls | |
| EEG-EMG | 17 healthy controls17 ALS patients | Beta-band CMC was significantly reduced in ALS patients compared to healthy controls. | |
| EEG-EMG | 8 healthy subjects21 stroke patients | Stroke patients had significantly lower CMC compared with healthy subjects for the anterior deltoid and brachii muscles. | |
Correlations of CMC and Stroke.
| Reference | Number of Patients | Stroke Type | CMC value (Patients vs Controls) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hemorrhage | Peak CMC in Beta Band (only patients) | |
| 21 | 17/21 Ischemia 4/21 Hemorrhage | Patients < Controls | |
| 5 | 1/5 Ischemia 4/5 Hemorrhage | Patients > Controls | |
| 25 | Patients < Controls | ||
| 11 | Ischemia | Patients < Controls | |
| 6 | Patients < Controls | ||
| 19 | Ischemia | Patients < Controls | |
| 12 | ES CMC > sham ES CMC (only patients) | ||
| 8 | 5/8 Ischemia 3/8 Hemorrhage | Patients < Controls | |
| 8 | 3/8 Ischemia 5/8 Hemorrhage | Peak CMC in Beta Band (only patients) | |
Correlations of CMC and Parkinson.
| Reference | Number of Patients | Stimulation | CMC value (Patients vs Controls) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | yes | DBS modifies patients’ CMC (only patients) | |
| 10 | yes | Patients < Controls | |
| 10 | no | Patients < Controls | |
| 20 | no | Patients < Controls | |
Correlations of CMC and other diseases.
| Reference | Number of Patients | Disease Type | CMC value (Patients vs Controls) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | ET | Patients < Controls | |
| 37 | ET | Patients > Controls | |
| 10 | 7/10 ET 3/10 EPT | Significant CMC at the tremor frequency in ET patients (only patients) | |
| 19 | SCA2 | Patients < Controls | |
| 15 | SCA2 | Patients < Controls | |
| 17 | ALS | Patients < Controls | |
| 8 | SCI | Patients < Controls | |
| 14 | SCI | Patients < Controls | |
FIGURE 3Corticomuscular coherence application areas distribution for the disorders.