Literature DB >> 7779331

Facilitatory effect of thinking about movement on motor-evoked potentials to transcranial magnetic stimulation of the brain.

S Izumi1, T W Findley, T Ikai, J Andrews, M Daum, N Chino.   

Abstract

Two experiments using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) were undertaken to investigate facilitatory effects of thinking about a specific movement without voluntary discharges on motor-evoked potentials (MEP). First, surface electromyographic (EMG) responses from the abductor pollicis brevis were recorded with maximal stimulator output in the three conditions: the muscle being at rest, contracting with 10% of maximal muscle activity, and with the subject "only thinking" about thumb abduction (nine subjects). Median value of MEP amplitudes during "only thinking" was twice that at rest (P = 0.008) and one-half that during voluntary contraction (P = 0.008). Second, needle EMG responses from the first dorsal interosseus were compared at rest, during thinking about index finger abduction, and during TMS at threshold intensity. Four normal subjects were tested with stimulation of each cerebral hemisphere for a total of eight tests. The number of detectable MEP responses of 20 stimuli to one hemisphere was counted for each condition of rest or thinking. The mean MEP response rate during thinking (58%) was higher than that at rest (12%) (P < 0.005). These results demonstrate that thinking about a specific movement has facilitatory effects on MEP and that the degree of facilitation in thinking is smaller than in voluntary contraction.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7779331     DOI: 10.1097/00002060-199505000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0894-9115            Impact factor:   2.159


  13 in total

1.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation coregistered with MRI: a comparison of a guided versus blind stimulation technique and its effect on evoked compound muscle action potentials.

Authors:  L D Gugino; J R Romero; L Aglio; D Titone; M Ramirez; A Pascual-Leone; E Grimson; N Weisenfeld; R Kikinis; M E Shenton
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  Changes in corticospinal motor excitability induced by non-motor linguistic tasks.

Authors:  I Papathanasiou; S R Filipović; R Whurr; J C Rothwell; M Jahanshahi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-10-08       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Pursuit eye movements involve a covert motor plan for manual tracking.

Authors:  Claudio Maioli; Luca Falciati; Tiziana Gianesini
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-07-04       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Differential effect of linguistic and non-linguistic pen-holding tasks on motor cortex excitability.

Authors:  Sasa R Filipović; Ilias Papathanasiou; Renate Whurr; John C Rothwell; Marjan Jahanshahi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-08-20       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Motor excitability during imagination and observation of foot dorsiflexions.

Authors:  Joachim Liepert; Nina Neveling
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.575

6.  Modulation of interhemispheric inhibition by volitional motor activity: an ipsilateral silent period study.

Authors:  Fabio Giovannelli; Alessandra Borgheresi; Fabrizio Balestrieri; Gaetano Zaccara; Maria Pia Viggiano; Massimo Cincotta; Ulf Ziemann
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2009-09-21       Impact factor: 5.182

7.  Nonphysiological factors in navigated TMS studies; confounding covariates and valid intracortical estimates.

Authors:  Sein Schmidt; Rouven Bathe-Peters; Robert Fleischmann; Maria Rönnefarth; Michael Scholz; Stephan A Brandt
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Mental imagery-induced attention modulates pain perception and cortical excitability.

Authors:  Magdalena Sarah Volz; Vanessa Suarez-Contreras; Andrea L Santos Portilla; Felipe Fregni
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-15       Impact factor: 3.288

9.  Dynamic Changes in Upper-Limb Corticospinal Excitability during a 'Pro-/Anti-saccade' Double-Choice Task.

Authors:  Luca Falciati; Claudio Maioli
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-12-18       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  The supplementary motor area exerts a tonic excitatory influence on corticospinal projections to phrenic motoneurons in awake humans.

Authors:  Louis Laviolette; Marie-Cécile Niérat; Anna L Hudson; Mathieu Raux; Etienne Allard; Thomas Similowski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.