Literature DB >> 9989466

Distribution and latency of muscle responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation of motor cortex after spinal cord injury in humans.

B Calancie1, N Alexeeva, J G Broton, S Suys, A Hall, K J Klose.   

Abstract

Noninvasive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex was used to evoke electromyographic (EMG) responses in persons with spinal cord injury (n = 97) and able-bodied subjects (n = 20, for comparative data). Our goal was to evaluate, for different levels and severity of spinal cord injury, potential differences in the distribution and latency of motor responses in a large sample of muscles affected by the injury. The spinal cord injury (SCI) population was divided into subgroups based upon injury location (cervical, thoracic, and thoracolumbar) and clinical status (motor-complete versus motor-incomplete). Cortical stimuli were delivered while subjects attempted to contract individual muscles, in order to both maximize the probability of a response to TMS and minimize the response latency. Subjects with motor-incomplete injuries to the cervical or thoracic spinal cord were more likely to demonstrate volitional and TMS-evoked contractions in muscles controlling their foot and ankle (i.e., distal lower limb muscles) compared to muscles of the thigh (i.e., proximal lower limb muscles). When TMS did evoke responses in muscles innervated at levels caudal to the spinal cord lesion, response latencies of muscles in the lower limbs were delayed equally for persons with injury to the cervical or thoracic spinal cord, suggesting normal central motor conduction velocity in motor axons caudal to the lesion. In fact, motor response distribution and latencies were essentially indistinguishable for injuries to the cervical or thoracic (at or rostral to T10) levels of the spine. In contrast, motor-incomplete SCI subjects with injuries at the thoracolumbar level showed a higher probability of preserved volitional movements and TMS-evoked contractions in proximal muscles of the lower limb, and absent responses in distal muscles. When responses to TMS were seen in this group, the latencies were not significantly longer than those of able-bodied (AB) subjects, strongly suggestive of "root sparing" as a basis for motor function in subjects with injury at or caudal to the T11 vertebral body. Both the distribution and latency of TMS-evoked responses are consistent with highly focal lesions to the spinal cord in the subjects examined. The pattern of preserved responsiveness predominating in the distal leg muscles is consistent with a greater role of corticospinal tract innervation of these muscles compared to more proximal muscles of the thigh and hip.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 9989466     DOI: 10.1089/neu.1999.16.49

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurotrauma        ISSN: 0897-7151            Impact factor:   5.269


  21 in total

1.  The amplitude of lower leg motor evoked potentials is a reliable measure when controlled for torque and motor task.

Authors:  Hubertus J A van Hedel; Christian Murer; Volker Dietz; Armin Curt
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2007-04-13       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Neurophysiological examination of the corticospinal system and voluntary motor control in motor-incomplete human spinal cord injury.

Authors:  W B McKay; D C Lee; H K Lim; S A Holmes; A M Sherwood
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-12-23       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Peripheral nociception associated with surgical incision elicits remote nonischemic cardioprotection via neurogenic activation of protein kinase C signaling.

Authors:  W Keith Jones; Guo-Chang Fan; Siyun Liao; Jun-Ming Zhang; Yang Wang; Neal L Weintraub; Evangelia G Kranias; Jo El Schultz; John Lorenz; Xiaoping Ren
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Four-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation using multiple conditioning inputs. Normative MEP responses.

Authors:  Blair Calancie; Dongliang Wang; Eufrosina Young; Natalia Alexeeva
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) paired with massed practice training to promote adaptive plasticity and motor recovery in chronic incomplete tetraplegia: A pilot study.

Authors:  Kelsey A Potter-Baker; Daniel P Janini; Yin-Liang Lin; Vishwanath Sankarasubramanian; David A Cunningham; Nicole M Varnerin; Patrick Chabra; Kevin L Kilgore; Mary Ann Richmond; Frederick S Frost; Ela B Plow
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 1.985

6.  Efficacy of QuadroPulse rTMS for improving motor function after spinal cord injury: Three case studies.

Authors:  Natalia Alexeeva; Blair Calancie
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2014-12-01       Impact factor: 1.985

7.  The corticomotor projection to liminally-contractable forearm muscles in chronic spinal cord injury: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.

Authors:  M Cortes; G W Thickbroom; J Elder; A Rykman; J Valls-Sole; A Pascual-Leone; D J Edwards
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 2.772

8.  Motor recovery after spinal cord injury enhanced by strengthening corticospinal synaptic transmission.

Authors:  Karen L Bunday; Monica A Perez
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-11-29       Impact factor: 10.834

9.  Preserved corticospinal conduction without voluntary movement after spinal cord injury.

Authors:  D J Edwards; M Cortes; G W Thickbroom; A Rykman; A Pascual-Leone; B T Volpe
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 10.  And yet it moves: Recovery of volitional control after spinal cord injury.

Authors:  G Taccola; D Sayenko; P Gad; Y Gerasimenko; V R Edgerton
Journal:  Prog Neurobiol       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 11.685

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.