The influence of individual motor imagery ability on cerebral recruitment during gait imagery

Abstract

Motor imagery (MI) is often used in combination with neuroimaging techniques to study the cognitive control of gait. However, imagery ability (IA) varies widely across individuals, potentially influencing the pattern of cerebral recruitment during MI. The aim of the current study was to investigate this effect of IA on the neural correlates of gait control using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Twenty healthy young subjects were subdivided into a good and bad imagers group, on the basis of their performance on two mental chronometry tests. For the whole group, MI activated a bilateral network of areas highly consistent with previous studies, encompassing primary motor cortex (BA 4), supplementary motor area, and other frontal and parietal areas, anterior insula, and cerebellum. Compared to bad imagers, good imagers showed higher activation in the right BA 4, left prefrontal cortex (BA 10), right thalamus, and bilateral cerebellum. Good imagers thus appear better able to recruit motor areas during MI, but also activate a prefrontal executive area (BA 10), which integrates information from the body and the environment and participates in higher-order gait control. These differences were found even though the two groups did not differ in other imagery abilities according to a standard questionnaire for vividness of motor and visual imagery. Future studies on MI should take into account these effects, and control for IA when comparing different populations, using appropriate measures. A better understanding of the neural mechanisms that underlie MI ability is crucial to accurately evaluate locomotor skills in clinical measures and neurorehabilitation techniques. Hum Brain Mapp 00:000-000, 2012. V C 2012 Wiley-Periodicals, Inc.

Brain Activity during Mental Imagery of Gait Versus Gait-Like Plantar Stimulation: A Novel Combined Functional MRI Paradigm to Better Understand Cerebral Gait Control

“…These findings are consistent with numerous studies of locomotor imagery (Jahn et al, 2004, 2008; Sacco et al, 2006; Wagner et al, 2008; Wang et al, 2008a,b; la Fougère et al, 2010; van der Meulen et al, 2014), including a recent systematic review by Hamacher et al (2015). However, we did not find significant activations of the cingulate cortex, basal ganglia, parahippocampal gyrus, mesencephalic locomotor region or cerebellum, which have been reported in other studies (Jahn et al, 2004, 2008; Sacco et al, 2006; Wang et al, 2008b; la Fougère et al, 2010; van der Meulen et al, 2014; Peterson et al, 2014b). This difference may be related to the choice of the control condition used (REST), in which the participant was instructed to stop the imagination task, while in most mental imagery studies, subjects were instructed to imagine standing or lying as the control condition.…”

Resting‐state functional connectivity of subcortical locomotor centers explains variance in walking capacity

“…(Allali et al, 2014, Bakker et al, 2008, Cremers et al, 2012, Godde and Voelcker-Rehage, 2010, Iseki et al, 2008, Hanakawa et al, 1999, Jaeger et al, 2014, Jaeger et al, 2016, Jahn et al, 2008, Jahn et al, 2004, Karachi et al, 2012, la Fougere et al, 2010, Martinez et al, 2016, van der Meulen et al, 2014, Wagner et al, 2008, Wutte et al, 2012, Zwergal et al, 2012) The ALE significance map (p<0.01, uncorrected) included 6,790 voxels (54,320 mm 3 ) distributed across the brain with the largest clusters in the anterior, superior, medial cerebellum, medial motor cortices, and bilateral anterior insular cortices (Supplemental Figure 1). Eighty-one out of 296 parcels (27%) from the BnS atlas had ≥15 voxels (120 mm 3 ) with gait-related ALE p<0.01.…”

Brain activity during walking: A systematic review

“…Compared to a lying condition (see Table 1), walking was associated with enhanced activation in at least three studies in cortical and subcortical structures as supplementary motor area (SMA) Jahn et al, 2004;La Fougere et al, 2010;Miyai et al, 2001;Sacco et al, 2006;van der Meulen et al, 2014;Wang et al, 2008a;Wang et al, 2008b), prefrontal cortex Jahn et al, 2004;La Fougere et al, 2010;Sacco et al, 2006), cingulate cortex Sacco et al, 2006;Wang et al, 2008a;Zwergal et al, 2012), parietal areas (Jahn et al, 2004;Sacco et al, 2006;van der Meulen et al, 2014;Wang et al, 2008a;Wang et al, 2008b), cuneus/precuneus Jahn et al, 2004;Sacco et al, 2006;Wang et al, 2008a;Wang et al, 2008b), putamen (Jahn et al, 2004;La Fougere et al, 2010;Wang et al, 2008a), insula (Jahn et al, 2004;Sacco et al, 2006;van der Meulen et al, 2014;Zwergal et al, 2012), parahippocampal gyrus Jahn et al, 2004;Jahn et al, 2009;La Fougere et al, 2010;Wang et al, 2008b) and cerebellum Jahn et al, 2004;La Fougere et al, 2010;Sacco et al, 2006;van der Meulen et al, 2014;Wang et al, 2008a). Addi...…”