Transcranial static magnetic stimulation over the primary motor cortex alters sequential implicit motor learning

Nojima, Ippei; Watanabe, Tatsunori; Gyoda, Tomoya; Sugata, Hisato; Ikeda, Takashi; Mima, Tatsuya

doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2018.12.010

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In stark opposition to the present findings, a recent report showed that application of SMS over contralateral M1 did not impair online learning during SRTT, but rather facilitated offline learning as compared to sham stimulation 51 . With respect to online learning, one possibility that could account for this discrepancy is the differing application duration and timing of SMS over M1 during the acquisition session of the present design as compared to Nojima and colleagues 51 . Namely, whereas SMS was applied 10 min before and during the initial SRTT session (i.e., total of ~30 min) in the present design, Nojima and colleagues (2018) applied SMS for ~10 min selectively during acquisition.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Static magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex impairs online but not offline motor sequence learning

Lacroix

Proulx-Bégin²,

Hamel

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static magnetic fields (SMFs) are known to alter neural activity, but evidence of their ability to modify learning-related neuroplasticity is lacking. The present study tested the hypothesis that application of static magnetic stimulation (SMS), an SMF applied transcranially via a neodymium magnet, over the primary motor cortex (M1) would alter learning of a serial reaction time task (SRTT). Thirty-nine participants took part in two experimental sessions separated by 24 h where they had to learn the SRTT with their right hand. During the first session, two groups received SMS either over contralateral (i.e., left) or ipsilateral (i.e., right) M1 while a third group received sham stimulation. SMS was not applied during the second session. Results of the first session showed that application of SMS over contralateral M1 impaired online learning as compared to both ipsilateral and sham groups, which did not differ. Results further revealed that application of SMS did not impair offline learning or relearning. Overall, these results are in line with those obtained using other neuromodulatory techniques believed to reduce cortical excitability in the context of motor learning and suggest that the ability of SMS to alter learning-related neuroplasticity is temporally circumscribed to the duration of its application.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Static magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex impairs online but not offline motor sequence learning

Lacroix

Proulx-Bégin²,

Hamel

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results agree with reports where TMS in the motor cortex is able to improve the learning of motor sequences in 22 year olds. 26 Similarly, they agree with memory improvement in mice exposed to microgravity conditions (which causes cognitive damage); in that case, 15 Hz TMS was applied for 14 consecutive days. 27 In this investigation, memory improvement was associated with an increase in dendritic spine density of the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, as well as an increase in the expression of postsynaptic proteins NR2A, NR2B, PSD95 (associated with memory formation ) as well as an increase in BNDF/ TrkB growth factors.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…Burns inventories were used to detect levels of depression and anxiety. The anxiety inventory has a score of 0 to 100 and the classification of minimum anxiety (0-4), limit (5-10), light (11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20), moderate (21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30), severe (41-50) and extreme (51-100). The inventory of depression has a score of 0 to 100 and is classified in the categories of non-deprecated (0-5), normal but unhappy (6-10), minimal depression (11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25), moderate depression (26-50), severe depression (51-75) and extreme depression (76-100).…”

Section: Materials/equipmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness of exogenous melatonin versus transcranial magnetic stimulation on the quality of sleep, memory and mood of young adult people

Javier¹,

Arturo²,

Raquel³

et al. 2019

PPIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Melatonin is a neurohormone that is secreted in the brain and which is associated with the sleep cycle, its clinical uses have been focused on sleep disorders, as well as on the improvement of cognitive performance and people's mood. Likewise, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) has been used in the same areas. The objective of this research was to analyze for two weeks, in young adults with an average age of 24 (the minimum age was 18 and the maximum was 32), which of the two treatments was more effective in inducing improvements in sleep quality, memory and mood. Four groups were formed, the placebo group (n=28), the sham group (n=28), the melatonin group (n=25) and the TMS group (n=16). All groups had a pre-test evaluation of sleep quality, memory, depression and anxiety. The experimental phase lasted 2 weeks and consisted of placebo exposure, sham stimulation, melatonin consumption (10 mg) and TMS (128 Hz). After this period, the post-test evaluation was carried out. The results showed that both treatments were equally effective in improving sleep quality, although TMS was more effective in improving memory and anxiety symptoms. It is inferred that both treatments are effective, although the question arises about their long-term use and the maintenance of the improvements.

show abstract

“…Two adult studies found that visual cortex tSMS could inhibit visual search performance and reduce experimental photophobia (Gonzalez-Rosa et al, 2015;Lozano-Soto et al, 2017). One study of tSMS over M1 suggested inhibitory effects on pinch force (Nakagawa and Nakazawa, 2018) while another found improved reaction times in an implicit motor learning task (Nojima et al, 2019). Studies support favorable safety and tolerability when tSMS was administered for up to 120 min (Oliviero et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transcranial Static Magnetic Field Stimulation of the Motor Cortex in Children

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Non-invasive neuromodulation is an emerging therapy for children with early brain injury but is difficult to apply to preschoolers when windows of developmental plasticity are optimal. Transcranial static magnetic field stimulation (tSMS) decreases primary motor cortex (M1) excitability in adults but effects on the developing brain are unstudied. Objective/Hypothesis: We aimed to determine the effects of tSMS on cortical excitability and motor learning in healthy children. We hypothesized that tSMS over right M1 would reduce cortical excitability and inhibit contralateral motor learning. Methods: This randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded, three-arm, cross-over trial enrolled 24 healthy children aged 10-18 years. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) assessed cortical excitability via motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude and paired pulse measures. Motor learning was assessed via the Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT). A tSMS magnet (677 Newtons) or sham was held over left or right M1 for 30 min while participants trained the non-dominant hand. A linear mixed effect model was used to examine intervention effects. Results: All 72 tSMS sessions were well tolerated without serious adverse effects. Neither cortical excitability as measured by MEPs nor paired-pulse intracortical neurophysiology was altered by tSMS. Possible behavioral effects included contralateral tSMS inhibiting early motor learning (p < 0.01) and ipsilateral tSMS facilitating later stages of motor learning (p < 0.01) in the trained non-dominant hand. Conclusion: tSMS is feasible in pediatric populations. Unlike adults, tSMS did not produce measurable changes in MEP amplitude. Possible effects of M1 tSMS on motor learning require further study. Our findings support further exploration of tSMS neuromodulation in young children with cerebral palsy.

show abstract

Transcranial static magnetic stimulation over the primary motor cortex alters sequential implicit motor learning

Cited by 31 publications

References 30 publications

Static magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex impairs online but not offline motor sequence learning

Static magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex impairs online but not offline motor sequence learning

The effectiveness of exogenous melatonin versus transcranial magnetic stimulation on the quality of sleep, memory and mood of young adult people

Transcranial Static Magnetic Field Stimulation of the Motor Cortex in Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About