Normal Motor Adaptation in Cervical Dystonia: A Fundamental Cerebellar Computation is Intact

Sadnicka, Anna; Patani, Bansi; Saifee, Tabish A.; Kassavetis, Panagiotis; Pareés, Isabel; Korlipara, Prasad; Bhatia, Kailash P.; Rothwell, John C.; Galea, Joseph M.; Edwards, Mark J.

doi:10.1007/s12311-014-0569-0

Cited by 35 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As opposed to healthy individuals, patients did not display modulations of PAS. Similar findings were observed in a separate study in cervical dystonia that used anodal TDCS CB and showed no impact on subsequent PAS applied to M1 [56]. These two studies suggest that loss of cerebellar control over sensorimotor plasticity could underlie alterations of specific motor programs involved in writing.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…post)↔ ↔ (HC) Koch et al (2014) [57]CDISI: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 msCS: 80 % AMTTS: 1 mV↔Kishore et al (2014) [51]PD with LIDsISI: 2.5 msCS: 70 % RMTTS: 1 mV↔iTBSBonnì et al (2014) [58]PCSISI: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 msCS: 80 % AMTTS: 1 mV↔Brusa et al (2014) [59]PSPISI: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 msCS: 80 % AMTTS: 1 mV↔LICIcTBSKoch et al (2009) [48]PD with LIDISI: 100 and 150 msCS: 120 % RMTTS: 1 mV↑ 100 msHubsch et al (2013) [49]WDSI: 100 msCS: 120 % RMTTS: 130 % RMT (adj. post)↔ ↔ (HC) Kishore et al (2014) [51]PD with LIDsISI: 100 msCS: 110 % RMTTS: 1 mV↔CSPAnodal TDCSSadnicka et al (2014) [56]WD20 % maximal force APBTS: 120 % RMT↔cTBSKoch et al (2014) [57]CD50 % maximal forceTS: 130 % RMT↔4. Intracortical facilitationcTBSKoch et al (2009) [48]PDISI: 7, 10 and 15 msCS: 80 % AMTTS: 1 mV↔Carrillo et al (2013) [36]PDISI: 7, 10 and 15 msCS: 80 % AMTTS: 1 mV↔ ↔ (HC) Di Lorenzo et al (2013) [40]ADISI: 7, 10 and 15 msCS: 80 % AMTTS: 1 mV↔ ↔ (HC) Hubsch et al (2013) [49]WDSI: 15 msCS: 70 % RMTTS: 130 % RMT (adj.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…post)CS: 130 % sensory threshold↔ ↔ (HC) 6. Motor cortex plasticityPASAnodal TDCSSadnicka et al (2014) [56]WDISI: 25 ms↔cTBSHubsch et al (2013) [49]WDISI: 25 ms↔Koch et al (2014) [57]CDISI: 25 ms↑ (topographic specificity)Kishore et al (2014) [51]PD with LIDsISI: 25 ms↑ ↔ (HC) iTBSHubsch et al (2013) [49]WDISI: 25 ms↔iTBScTBSKishore et al (2014) [51]PD with LIDsISI: 25 ms↔ AD Alzheimer’s disease, AMT active motor threshold, CBI cerebellar brain inhibition, CS conditioning stimulus, Contra contralateral, CSP cortical silent period, ET essential tremor, HC healthy controls, ICF intracortical facilitation, Ipsi . ipsilateral, ISI inter-stimulus interval, LAI long latency afferent inhibition, LICI long interval intracortical inhibition, LIDs levodopa-induced dyskinesias, MEP motor evoked potential, PAS paired-associative stimulation, PCS posterior circulation stroke, PD Parkinson’s disease, PSP progressive supranuclear palsy, RT resting tremors, SAI short latency afferent inhibition, SICI short interval intracortical inhibition, TS test stimulus, WD writing dystonia…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Non-invasive brain stimulation as a tool to study cerebellar-M1 interactions in humans

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent development of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has allowed the non-invasive assessment of cerebellar function in humans. Early studies showed that cerebellar activity, as reflected in the excitability of the dentate-thalamo-cortical pathway, can be assessed with paired stimulation of the cerebellum and the primary motor cortex (M1) (cerebellar inhibition of motor cortex, CBI). Following this, many attempts have been made, using techniques such as repetitive TMS and transcranial electrical stimulation (TES), to modulate the activity of the cerebellum and the dentate-thalamo-cortical output, and measure their impact on M1 activity. The present article reviews literature concerned with the impact of non-invasive stimulation of cerebellum on M1 measures of excitability and “plasticity” in both healthy and clinical populations. The main conclusion from the 27 reviewed articles is that the effects of cerebellar “plasticity” protocols on M1 activity are generally inconsistent. Nevertheless, two measurements showed relatively reproducible effects in healthy individuals: reduced response of M1 to sensorimotor “plasticity” (paired-associative stimulation, PAS) and reduced CBI following repetitive TMS and TES. We discuss current challenges, such as the low power of reviewed studies, variability in stimulation parameters employed and lack of understanding of physiological mechanisms underlying CBI.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionunclassified

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Non-invasive brain stimulation as a tool to study cerebellar-M1 interactions in humans

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, it has been recently reported that CD patients did not differ from HS in the adaptation of the walking parameter, including speed, step width, step length symmetry and swing/stance ratio (Hoffland et al, 2014). Using a visuomotor task, Sadnicka et al (2014) tested the hypothesis that cerebellar abnormalities in CD patients would translate into motor adaptation deficits. However, not only were adaptation rates (learning) in CD patients found to be similar to those of HS, but the ability to adapt had no relationship with the clinical features of CD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of cerebellar theta-burst stimulation on arm and neck movement kinematics in patients with focal dystonia

Bologna

Paparella

Fabbrini

et al. 2016

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate the cerebellar inhibitory influence on the primary motor cortex in patients with focal dystonia using a cerebellar continuous theta-burst stimulation protocol (cTBS) and to evaluate any relationship with movement abnormalities. Methods Thirteen patients with focal hand dystonia, 13 patients with cervical dystonia and 13 healthy subjects underwent two sessions: (i) cTBS over the cerebellar hemisphere (real cTBS) and (ii) cTBS over the neck muscles (sham cTBS). The effects of cerebellar cTBS were quantified as excitability changes in the contralateral primary motor cortex, as well as possible changes in arm and neck movements in patients. Results Real cerebellar cTBS reduced the excitability in the contralateral primary motor cortex in healthy subjects and in patients with cervical dystonia, though not in patients with focal hand dystonia. There was no correlation between changes in primary motor cortex excitability and arm and neck movement kinematics in patients. There were no changes in clinical scores or in kinematic measures, after either real or sham cerebellar cTBS in patients. Conclusions The reduced cerebellar inhibitory modulation of primary motor cortex excitability in focal dystonia may be related to the body areas affected by dystonia as opposed to being a widespread pathophysiological abnormality. Significance The present study yields information on the differential role played by the cerebellum in the pathophysiology of different focal dystonias.

show abstract

“…Abnormal motor learning in cervical dystonia was previously shown in a computer-based upper limb target task [24] and in eyeblink conditioning [25] suggesting that cerebellar function is certainly impaired. However, the results of the Hoffland study and recent work by Sadnicka et al [26] should temper these assumptions. Sadnicka et al investigated the adaptation in patients with cervical dystonia to both visuomotor (distorting visual feedback) and force field (applying a velocity-dependent force) perturbations of arm movements using a robotic manipulandum.…”

mentioning

confidence: 83%

Dissecting the Links Between Cerebellum and Dystonia

Malone

Manto²,

Hass

2014

Cerebellum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dystonia is a common movement disorder characterized by sustained muscle contractions. These contractions generate twisting and repetitive movements or typical abnormal postures, often exacerbated by voluntary movement. Dystonia can affect almost all the voluntary muscles. For several decades, the discussion on the pathogenesis has been focused on basal ganglia circuits, especially striatal networks. So far, although dystonia has been observed in some forms of ataxia such as dominant ataxias, the link between the cerebellum and dystonia has remained unclear. Recent human studies and experimental data mainly in rodents show that the cerebellum circuitry could also be a key player in the pathogenesis of some forms of dystonia. In particular, studies based on behavioral adaptation paradigm shed light on the links between dystonia and cerebellum. The spectrum of movement disorders in which the cerebellum is implicated is continuously expanding, and manipulation of cerebellar circuits might even emerge as a candidate therapy in the coming years.

show abstract

Normal Motor Adaptation in Cervical Dystonia: A Fundamental Cerebellar Computation is Intact

Cited by 35 publications

References 50 publications

Non-invasive brain stimulation as a tool to study cerebellar-M1 interactions in humans

Non-invasive brain stimulation as a tool to study cerebellar-M1 interactions in humans

Effects of cerebellar theta-burst stimulation on arm and neck movement kinematics in patients with focal dystonia

Dissecting the Links Between Cerebellum and Dystonia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About