Long Latency Electromyographic Response Induced by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation over the Cerebellum Preferentially Appears During Continuous Visually Guided Manual Tracking Task

Matsugi, Akiyoshi; Iwata, Yasuyuki; Mori, Nobuhiko; Horino, Hiroshi; Hiraoka, Koichi

doi:10.1007/s12311-012-0402-6

Cited by 16 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(29 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The figure-of-eight coil was positioned at the hotspot for MEPs on the right first dorsal interosseous muscle (FDI), and the current in the coil was directed anterior to posterior. The center of the junction region of the double-cone coil was placed 1 cm below and 3 cm to the right of the inion to stimulate the right cerebellum (Théoret et al, 2001;Hiraoka et al, 2009;Hiraoka et al, 2010;Matsugi et al, 2012;Matsugi et al, 2013;Hardwick et al, 2014;Matsugi et al, 2014;Matsugi et al, 2015), and the current in the coil was directed downward, thus inducing an upwardly traveling current in the brain. To record electromyography (EMG) signals, two Ag/AgCl surface-recording electrodes were placed 2 cm apart on the right FDI.…”

Section: Tmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The intensity of the conditioning TMS was set at 90% of the rMT of the cervicomedullary MEP (CMEP) on the right FDI when the junction center of the double-cone coil was placed 1 cm below and 3 cm to the right of the inion (Théoret et al, 2001;Hiraoka et al, 2009;Hiraoka et al, 2010;Matsugi et al 2012;Matsugi et al, 2013;Hardwick et al, 2014;Matsugi et al, 2014;Matsugi et al, 2015). When the CMEP could not be in-@ C I C E d i z i o n i I n t e r n a z i o n a l i duced with the maximum intensity of the magnetic stimulator, the intensity of the conditioning cerebellar TMS was set at 90% of the maximum output of the magnetic stimulator (Hiraoka et al, 2010;Matsugi et al, 2013).To be certain that we obtained CBI, the test MEP size was set at 0.5 mV to 1 mV (Pinto and Chen, 2001). The magnetic stimulator was adjusted so that the intensity of the unconditioned MEP amplitude was approximately 1 mV before the examination, and this intensity was used at the pre, post, post5 and post10 time points.…”

Section: Experiments 2: Effect Of Tsms Over the Cerebellum On Cbimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cerebellar transcranial static magnetic field stimulation transiently reduces cerebellar brain inhibition

Matsugi¹,

Okada²

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe aim of this study was to investigate whether transcranial static magnetic field stimulation (tSMS) delivered using a compact cylindrical NdFeB magnet over the cerebellum modulates the excitability of the cerebellum and contralateral primary motor cortex, as measured using cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI), motor evoked potentials (MEPs), and resting motor threshold (rMT). These parameters were measured before tSMS or sham stimulation and immediately, 5 minutes and 10 minutes after stimulation. There were no significant changes in CBI, MEPs or rMT over time in the sham stimulation condition, and no changes in MEPs or rMT in the tSMS condition. However, CBI was significantly decreased immediately after tSMS as compared to that before and 5 minutes after tSMS. Our results suggest that tSMS delivered to the cerebellar hemisphere transiently reduces cerebellar inhibitory output but does not affect the excitability of the contralateral motor cortex.

show abstract

Section: Tmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments 2: Effect Of Tsms Over the Cerebellum On Cbimentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebellar transcranial static magnetic field stimulation transiently reduces cerebellar brain inhibition

Matsugi¹,

Okada²

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The maximum magnetic flux density of this double-cone coil was 0.96 T. The figure-of-eight coil was then positioned at the hotspot for MEPs on the right first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle and the current in the coil was directed in the anterior to posterior direction. The center of the junction of the double-cone coil was placed 1 cm below and 3 cm to the right of the inion to stimulate the right cerebellum 4 , 18 and the current in the coil was directed downward. This induced an upwardly traveling current in the brain.…”

Section: Participants and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation facilitates excitability of spinal reflex, but does not affect cerebellar inhibition and facilitation in spinocerebellar ataxia

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the cerebellum facilitates the spinal reflex in healthy humans. The aim of this study was to investigate whether such cerebellar spinal facilitation (CSpF) appears in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) presenting with atrophy in the cerebellar gray matter and dentate nucleus. One patient with SCA type 6 and another with SCA type 31 participated in this study. TMS over the right primary motor cortex was used to induce motor-evoked potentials in the right first dorsal interosseous muscle, which were detected using electromyography. Conditioning TMS using interstimulus intervals of 1–8 ms was performed over the right cerebellum as a test to measure cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI). To assess the H-reflex and the M-wave recruitment curve of the right soleus muscle, we performed electrical stimulation of the right tibial nerve. The stimulation intensity was set to that at the center of the H-reflex curve of the ascending limb. To measure CSpF, we delivered TMS over the right cerebellum 100, 110, 120, and 130 ms before the right tibial nerve stimulation. Voxel-based morphometry was used to verify the presence of atrophy in the cerebellar gray matter and dentate nucleus. CBI was absent in both cases. However, a significant facilitation of the H-reflex occurred with an interstimulus interval of 120 ms in both cases. These findings indicate that the pathways associated with the induction of CSpF and CBI are different, and that the cerebellar gray matter and dentate nucleus are not needed for the induction of CSpF. The possible origin of CSpF may be examined by stimulation of other cerebellar deep nuclei or the brainstem.

show abstract

“…The rMT for cerebellar TMS was defined as the lowest stimulation intensity producing a short-latency EMG response, which is cervicomedullary MEP, in the right FDI muscle immediately after the cerebellar TMS in five out of ten consecutive stimuli [14]. If the short-latency EMG response was not evoked even at the maximum stimulator output, the conditioning cerebellar TMS intensity was set at 90% of the maximum stimulator output [12,14,26].…”

Section: Tms Over Cerebellum (As Conditioning Stimulation)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Reduces the Silent Period on Hand Muscle Electromyography During Force Control

Matsugi

Douchi

Suzuki³

et al. 2020

Brain Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to investigate whether cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation (C-TMS) affected the cortical silent period (cSP) induced by TMS over the primary motor cortex (M1) and the effect of interstimulus interval (ISI) on cerebellar conditioning and TMS to the left M1 (M1-TMS). Fourteen healthy adult participants were instructed to control the abduction force of the right index finger to 20% of the maximum voluntary contraction. M1-TMS was delivered during this to induce cSP on electromyograph of the right first dorsal interosseous muscle. TMS over the right cerebellum (C-TMS) was conducted prior to M1-TMS. In the first experiment, M1-TMS intensity was set to 1 or 1.3 × resting motor threshold (rMT) with 20-ms ISI. In the second experiment, the intensity was set to 1 × rMT with ISI of 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, or 80 ms, and no-C-TMS trials were inserted. In results, cSP was significantly shorter in 1 × rMT condition than in 1.3 × rMT by C-TMS, and cSP was significantly shorter for ISI of 20–40 ms than for the no-C-TMS condition. Further, motor evoked potential for ISI40-60 ms were significantly reduced than that for ISI0. Thus, C-TMS may reduce cSP induced by M1-TMS with ISI of 20–40 ms.

show abstract

Long Latency Electromyographic Response Induced by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation over the Cerebellum Preferentially Appears During Continuous Visually Guided Manual Tracking Task

Cited by 16 publications

References 22 publications

Cerebellar transcranial static magnetic field stimulation transiently reduces cerebellar brain inhibition

Cerebellar transcranial static magnetic field stimulation transiently reduces cerebellar brain inhibition

Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation facilitates excitability of spinal reflex, but does not affect cerebellar inhibition and facilitation in spinocerebellar ataxia

Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Reduces the Silent Period on Hand Muscle Electromyography During Force Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About