New evidence of corticospinal network modulation induced by motor imagery

Grosprêtre, Sidney; Lebon, Florent; Papaxanthis, Charalambos; Martin, Alain

doi:10.1152/jn.00952.2015

Cited by 61 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, post‐synaptic modulation of motoneuronal responsiveness would have led to both conditioned and test H‐reflex increase (Grosprêtre et al . ). In fact, animal experiments have shown that the activation threshold of such spinal interneurons is lower than that of the motoneurons (Daniele & MacDermott, ), allowing them to be more sensitive to small stimuli such as the minor cortical output generated by MI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Interestingly, we demonstrated here that MI impacted specific spinal structures with lower level of excitability, as previously suggested (Grosprêtre et al . ). Accordingly, we found an increase in both conditioned H‐reflexes during MI, reflecting the modulation of presynaptic inhibition level, mediated by an interneuronal network.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other spinal structures, such as interneurons not directly related to the H‐reflex loop, may then also be activated during MI (Hale, ; Aoyama & Kaneko, ; Grosprêtre et al . ). By using an H‐reflex conditioning technique, Hale () suggested an involvement of the spinal presynaptic inhibitory pathway during MI.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…; Aoyama & Kaneko, ; Grosprêtre et al . ). While the spinal network could also play an important role in motor performance following MI practice (Grosprêtre et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary afferent depolarization (PAD) interneurons that are controlled by cortical projections (Jankowska, , ) may respond to subliminal cortical outputs such as those generated during MI (Grosprêtre et al . ). This may explain how MI activates spinal structures, even in the absence of clear H‐reflex changes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Spinal plasticity with motor imagery practice

Grosprêtre

Lebon

Papaxanthis

et al. 2018

The Journal of Physiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key points While a consensus has now been reached on the effect of motor imagery (MI) – the mental simulation of an action – on motor cortical areas, less is known about its impact on spinal structures. The current study, using H‐reflex conditioning paradigms, examined the effect of a 20 min MI practice on several spinal mechanisms of the plantar flexor muscles. We observed modulations of spinal presynaptic circuitry while imagining, which was even more pronounced following an acute session of MI practice. We suggested that the small cortical output generated during MI may reach specific spinal circuits and that repeating MI may increase the sensitivity of the spinal cord to its effects. The short‐term plasticity induced by MI practice may include spinal network modulation in addition to cortical reorganization. Abstract Kinesthetic motor imagery (MI) is the mental simulation of a movement with its sensory consequences but without its concomitant execution. While the effect of MI practice on cortical areas is well known, its influence on spinal circuitry remains unclear. Here, we assessed plastic changes in spinal structures following an acute MI practice. Thirteen young healthy participants accomplished two experimental sessions: a 20 min MI training consisting of four blocks of 25 imagined maximal isometric plantar flexions, and a 20 min rest (control session). The level of spinal presynaptic inhibition was assessed by conditioning the triceps surae spinal H‐reflex with two methods: (i) the stimulation of the common peroneal nerve that induced D1 presynaptic inhibition (HPSI response), and (ii) the stimulation of the femoral nerve that induced heteronymous Ia facilitation (HFAC response). We then compared the effects of MI on unconditioned (HTEST) and conditioned (HPSI and HFAC) responses before, immediately after and 10 min after the 20 min session. After resting for 20 min, no changes were observed on the recorded parameters. After MI practice, the amplitude of rest HTEST was unchanged, while HPSI and HFAC significantly increased, showing a reduction of presynaptic inhibition with no impact on the afferent‐motoneuronal synapse. The current results revealed the acute effect of MI practice on baseline spinal presynaptic inhibition, increasing the sensitivity of the spinal circuitry to MI. These findings will help in understanding the mechanisms of neural plasticity following chronic practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…; Aoyama & Kaneko, ; Grosprêtre et al . ). While the spinal network could also play an important role in motor performance following MI practice (Grosprêtre et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Spinal plasticity with motor imagery practice

Grosprêtre

Lebon

Papaxanthis

et al. 2018

The Journal of Physiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The influence of imagery capacity in motor performance improvement

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motor imagery (MI) training improves motor performance, but the inter-individual variability of this improvement remains still unexplored. In this study, we tested the influence of imagery ability on the performance improvement following MI training. Twenty participants were randomly distributed into the MI or control group. They actually performed, at pre- and post-test sessions, a revisited version of the Nine Hole Peg Test, a speed-accuracy trade-off task, commonly used in clinics. Between the tests, the MI group mentally trained on the task (5 blocks of 10 trials), while the control group watched a non-emotional documentary. Before and during MI training, we tested the imagery ability of the MI group, by the revised version of Movement Imagery Questionnaire and by the estimation of vividness for the movement task at each block (subjective evaluation-SE). In the post-test, the MI group significantly decreased the movement duration by -12.1 ± 5.7% (P < 0.001), whereas the control group did not (-2.68 ± 5%, P = 0.68). For the MI group, the percentage of improvement was correlated neither to the MIQ-R nor to the SE reported after block 1. However, we observed an evolution of the SE during training, with a positive correlation between performance improvement and SE at block 4 (R = 0.61, P = 0.03) and at block 5 (R = 0.68, P = 0.04). The current study shows that motor performance may be positively influenced, whilst not predicted, by the capacity to form vivid movement images throughout the mental training. These findings are of interest for clinical interventions using MI as a complementary rehabilitation tool.

show abstract