The association of motor imagery and kinesthetic illusion prolongs the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on corticospinal tract excitability

Fuminari Kaneko, Eriko Shibata, Tatsuya Hayami, Keita Nagahata, Toshiyuki Aoyama, Fuminari Kaneko, Eriko Shibata, Tatsuya Hayami, Keita Nagahata, Toshiyuki Aoyama

Abstract

Background: A kinesthetic illusion induced by a visual stimulus (KI) can produce vivid kinesthetic perception. During KI, corticospinal tract excitability increases and results in the activation of cerebral networks. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is emerging as an alternative potential therapeutic modality for a variety of neurological and psychiatric conditions, such that identifying factors that enhance the magnitude and duration of tDCS effects is currently a topic of great scientific interest. This study aimed to establish whether the combination of tDCS with KI and sensory-motor imagery (MI) induces larger and longer-lasting effects on the excitability of corticomotor pathways in healthy Japanese subjects.

Methods: A total of 21 healthy male volunteers participated in this study. Four interventions were investigated in the first experiment: (1) anodal tDCS alone (tDCSa), (2) anodal tDCS with visually evoked kinesthetic illusion (tDCSa + KI), (3) anodal tDCS with motor imagery (tDCSa + MI), and (4) anodal tDCS with kinesthetic illusion and motor imagery (tDCSa + KIMI). In the second experiment, we added a sham tDCS intervention with kinesthetic illusion and motor imagery (sham + KIMI) as a control for the tDCSa + KIMI condition. Direct currents were applied to the right primary motor cortex. Corticospinal excitability was examined using transcranial magnetic stimulation of the area associated with the left first dorsal interosseous.

Results: In the first experiment, corticomotor excitability was sustained for at least 30 min following tDCSa + KIMI (p < 0.01). The effect of tDCSa + KIMI on corticomotor excitability was greater and longer-lasting than that achieved in all other conditions. In the second experiment, significant effects were not achieved following sham + KIMI.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that tDCSa + KIMI has a greater therapeutic potential than tDCS alone for inducing higher excitability of the corticospinal tract. The observed effects may be related to sustained potentiation of resultant cerebral activity during combined KI, MI, and tDCSa.

Keywords: Corticospinal tract; Kinesthetic illusion; Motor imagery; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; Visual stimulation.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic representation of multiple synchronized stimulations. Anodal tDCS was applied. An anode was placed above the motor hotspot of the left FDI and a cathode was placed above the contralateral orbit (a). A visual illusion was induced by having subjects view a movie of someone else’s index finger performing abduction/adduction (b). The subjects performed motor imagery of index finger abduction of their own index fingers (c)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Experimental timeline. Interventions were conducted for 15 min each. Cortical excitability was examined using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) prior to the intervention to establish control conditions (Baseline MEP = pre-intervention, PRE = 15 min after baseline MEP) and at timed intervals after the intervention (Post0 = 0 min post-intervention, Post30 = 30 min, and Post60 = 60 min). We calculated the ratio of MEP amplitudes at each post-intervention time-point relative to baseline MEPs [(MEP amplitude at each stage – baseline MEP amplitude)/baseline MEP amplitude × 100]
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The increase in MEP amplitudes under combination with tDCS. Superimposed raw EMGs of MEPs recorded from a single subject’s FDI in the tDCSa + KIMI and tDCSa conditions are shown (a). Results of the average MEP ratio from the FDI induced in each of the 4 conditions are shown for each time-point (b). Error bars indicate the standard deviation. *: p < 0.05 vs. PRE, **, ‡‡, §§: p < 0.01 vs. PRE (Dunnett’s post-hoc test). †: p < 0.05 vs. tDCSa (Tukey’s post-hoc test)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The MEP ratio in the sham + KIMI Results of the average MEP ratio of FDI induced in the sham + KIMI conditions at each time-point. Error bars indicate the standard deviation

References

    1. Kaneko F, Yasojima T, Kizuka T. Kinesthetic illusory feeling induced by a finger movement movie effects on corticomotor excitability. Neuroscience. 2007;149(4):976–84. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2007.07.028.
    1. Aoyama T, Kaneko F, Hayami T, Shibata E. The effects of kinesthetic illusory sensation induced by a visual stimulus on the corticomotor excitability of the leg muscles. Neurosci Lett. 2012;514(1):106–9. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2012.02.069.
    1. Kaneko F, Blanchard C, Lebar N, Nazarian B, Kavounoudias A, Romaiguère P. Brain Regions Associated to a Kinesthetic Illusion Evoked by Watching a Video of One’s Own Moving Hand. PLoS One. 2015;10(8):e0131970. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131970.
    1. Yahagi S, Shimura K, Kasai T. An increase in cortical excitability with no change in spinal excitability during motor imagery. Percept Mot Skills. 1996;83(1):288–90. doi: 10.2466/pms.1996.83.1.288.
    1. Kasai T, Kawai S, Kawanishi M, Yahagi S. Evidence for facilitation of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) induced by motor imagery. Brain Res. 1997;744(1):147–50. doi: 10.1016/S0006-8993(96)01101-8.
    1. Fadiga L, Buccino G, Craighero L, Fogassi L, Gallese V, Pavesi G. Corticospinal excitability is specifically modulated by motor imagery: a magnetic stimulation study. Neuropsychologia. 1999;37(2):147–58. doi: 10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00089-X.
    1. Roland PE, Larsen B, Lassen NA, Skinhøj E. Supplementary motor area and other cortical areas in organization of voluntary movements in man. J Neurophysiol. 1980;43(1):118–36.
    1. Porro CA, Francescato MP, Cettolo V, Diamond ME, Baraldi P, Zuiani C, et al. Primary motor and sensory cortex activation during motor performance and motor imagery: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurosci. 1996;16(23):7688–98.
    1. Hanakawa T, Dimyan MA, Hallett M. Motor planning, imagery, and execution in the distributed motor network: a time-course study with functional MRI. Cereb Cortex. 2008;18(12):2775–88. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhn036.
    1. Roth M, Decety J, Raybaudi M, Massarelli R, Delon-Martin C, Segebarth C, et al. Possible involvement of primary motor cortex in mentally simulated movement: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroreport. 1996;7(7):1280–4. doi: 10.1097/00001756-199605170-00012.
    1. Hummel FC, Cohen LG. Non-invasive brain stimulation: a new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke? Lancet Neurol. 2006;5(8):708–12. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70525-7.
    1. Hsu WY, Cheng CH, Liao KK, Lee IH, Lin YY. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor functions in patients with stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2012;43(7):1849–57. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.649756.
    1. Lefaucheur JP, André-Obadia N, Antal A, Ayache SS, Baeken C, Benninger DH, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(11):2150–206. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2014.05.021.
    1. Been G, Ngo TT, Miller SM, Fitzgerald PB. The use of tDCS and CVS as methods of non-invasive brain stimulation. Brain Res Rev. 2007;56(2):346–61. doi: 10.1016/j.brainresrev.2007.08.001.
    1. Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans. Neurology. 2001;57(10):1899–901. doi: 10.1212/WNL.57.10.1899.
    1. Vines BW, Nair DG, Schlaug G. Contralateral and ipsilateral motor effects after transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroreport. 2006;17(6):671–4. doi: 10.1097/00001756-200604240-00023.
    1. Boggio PS, Ferrucci R, Rigonatti SP, Covre P, Nitsche M, Pascual-Leone A, et al. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory in patients with Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Sci. 2006;249(1):31–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2006.05.062.
    1. Matsuo A, Maeoka H, Hiyamizu M, Shomoto K, Morioka S, Seki K. Enhancement of precise hand movement by transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroreport. 2011;22(2):78–82. doi: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32834298b3.
    1. Hummel FC, Heise K, Celnik P, Floel A, Gerloff C, Cohen LG. Facilitating skilled right hand motor function in older subjects by anodal polarization over the left primary motor cortex. Neurobiol Aging. 2010;31(12):2160–8. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2008.12.008.
    1. Fritsch B, Reis J, Martinowich K, Schambra HM, Ji Y, Cohen LG, et al. Direct current stimulation promotes BDNF-dependent synaptic plasticity: potential implications for motor learning. Neuron. 2010;66(2):198–204. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.03.035.
    1. Harris-Love ML, Cohen LG. Noninvasive cortical stimulation in neurorehabilitation: a review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87(12 Suppl 2):S84–93. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.08.330.
    1. Nitsche MA, Schauenburg A, Lang N, Liebetanz D, Exner C, Paulus W, et al. Facilitation of implicit motor learning by weak transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex in the human. J Cogn Neurosci. 2003;15(4):619–26. doi: 10.1162/089892903321662994.
    1. Bolognini N, Vallar G, Casati C, Latif LA, El-Nazer R, Williams J, et al. Neurophysiological and behavioral effects of tDCS combined with constraint-induced movement therapy in poststroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(9):819–29. doi: 10.1177/1545968311411056.
    1. Fregni F, Boggio PS, Mansur CG, Wagner T, Ferreira MJ, Lima MC, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients. Neuroreport. 2005;16(14):1551–5. doi: 10.1097/01.wnr.0000177010.44602.5e.
    1. Hummel F, Celnik P, Giraux P, Floel A, Wu WH, Gerloff C, et al. Effects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke. Brain. 2005;128(Pt 3):490–9. doi: 10.1093/brain/awh369.
    1. Hummel F, Cohen LG. Improvement of motor function with noninvasive cortical stimulation in a patient with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005;19(1):14–9. doi: 10.1177/1545968304272698.
    1. Hummel FC, Voller B, Celnik P, Floel A, Giraux P, Gerloff C, et al. Effects of brain polarization on reaction times and pinch force in chronic stroke. BMC Neurosci. 2006;7:73. doi: 10.1186/1471-2202-7-73.
    1. Tanaka S, Takeda K, Otaka Y, Kita K, Osu R, Honda M, et al. Single session of transcranial direct current stimulation transiently increases knee extensor force in patients with hemiparetic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(6):565–9. doi: 10.1177/1545968311402091.
    1. Madhavan S, Weber KA, Stinear JW. Non-invasive brain stimulation enhances fine motor control of the hemiparetic ankle: implications for rehabilitation. Exp Brain Res. 2011;209(1):9–17. doi: 10.1007/s00221-010-2511-0.
    1. Lindenberg R, Renga V, Zhu LL, Nair D, Schlaug G. Bihemispheric brain stimulation facilitates motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Neurology. 2010;75(24):2176–84. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318202013a.
    1. Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol. 2000;527(Pt 3):633–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x.
    1. Liebetanz D, Nitsche MA, Tergau F, Paulus W. Pharmacological approach to the mechanisms of transcranial DC-stimulation-induced after-effects of human motor cortex excitability. Brain. 2002;125(Pt 10):2238–47. doi: 10.1093/brain/awf238.
    1. Celnik P, Paik NJ, Vandermeeren Y, Dimyan M, Cohen LG. Effects of combined peripheral nerve stimulation and brain polarization on performance of a motor sequence task after chronic stroke. Stroke. 2009;40(5):1764–71. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.540500.
    1. Lindenberg R, Zhu LL, Schlaug G. Combined central and peripheral stimulation to facilitate motor recovery after stroke: the effect of number of sessions on outcome. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26(5):479–83. doi: 10.1177/1545968311427568.
    1. Uy J, Ridding MC, Hillier S, Thompson PD, Miles TS. Does induction of plastic change in motor cortex improve leg function after stroke? Neurology. 2003;61(7):982–4. doi: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000078809.33581.1F.
    1. Uy J, Ridding MC. Increased cortical excitability induced by transcranial DC and peripheral nerve stimulation. J Neurosci Methods. 2003;127(2):193–7. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0270(03)00142-0.
    1. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971;9(1):97–113. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4.
    1. Nitsche MA, Jaussi W, Liebetanz D, Lang N, Tergau F, Paulus W. Consolidation of human motor cortical neuroplasticity by D-cycloserine. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2004;29(8):1573–8. doi: 10.1038/sj.npp.1300517.
    1. Nitsche MA, Kuo MF, Grosch J, Bergner C, Monte-Silva K, Paulus W. D1-receptor impact on neuroplasticity in humans. J Neurosci. 2009;29(8):2648–53. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5366-08.2009.
    1. Nitsche MA, Lampe C, Antal A, Liebetanz D, Lang N, Tergau F, et al. Dopaminergic modulation of long-lasting direct current-induced cortical excitability changes in the human motor cortex. Eur J Neurosci. 2006;23(6):1651–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04676.x.
    1. Nitsche MA, Liebetanz D, Schlitterlau A, Henschke U, Fricke K, Frommann K, et al. GABAergic modulation of DC stimulation-induced motor cortex excitability shifts in humans. Eur J Neurosci. 2004;19(10):2720–6. doi: 10.1111/j.0953-816X.2004.03398.x.
    1. Nitsche MA, Seeber A, Frommann K, Klein CC, Rochford C, Nitsche MS, et al. Modulating parameters of excitability during and after transcranial direct current stimulation of the human motor cortex. J Physiol. 2005;568(Pt 1):291–303. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2005.092429.
    1. Aoyama T, Kaneko F. The effect of motor imagery on gain modulation of the spinal reflex. Brain Res. 2011;1372:41–8. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2010.11.023.
    1. Kaneko F, Murakami T, Onari K, Kurumadani H, Kawaguchi K. Decreased cortical excitability during motor imagery after disuse of an upper limb in humans. Clin Neurophysiol. 2003;114(12):2397–403. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00245-1.
    1. Rossini PM, Barker AT, Berardelli A, Caramia MD, Caruso G, Cracco RQ, et al. Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application. Report of an IFCN committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;91(2):79–92. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(94)90029-9.
    1. Rothwell JC, Hallett M, Berardelli A, Eisen A, Rossini P, Paulus W. Magnetic stimulation: motor evoked potentials. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl. 1999;52:97–103.
    1. Furubayashi T, Terao Y, Arai N, Okabe S, Mochizuki H, Hanajima R, et al. Short and long duration transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the human hand motor area. Exp Brain Res. 2008;185(2):279–86. doi: 10.1007/s00221-007-1149-z.
    1. Wiethoff S, Hamada M, Rothwell JC. Variability in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Motor Cortex. Brain Stimul. 2014;7(3):468–75. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2014.02.003.
    1. Hebb D. The Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsychological Theory. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1949.
    1. Wolters A, Sandbrink F, Schlottmann A, Kunesch E, Stefan K, Cohen LG, et al. A temporally asymmetric Hebbian rule governing plasticity in the human motor cortex. J Neurophysiol. 2003;89(5):2339–45. doi: 10.1152/jn.00900.2002.
    1. Stefan K, Kunesch E, Benecke R, Cohen LG, Classen J. Mechanisms of enhancement of human motor cortex excitability induced by interventional paired associative stimulation. J Physiol. 2002;543(Pt 2):699–708. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2002.023317.
    1. Stefan K, Kunesch E, Cohen LG, Benecke R, Classen J. Induction of plasticity in the human motor cortex by paired associative stimulation. Brain. 2000;123(Pt 3):572–84. doi: 10.1093/brain/123.3.572.
    1. Romaiguère P, Anton JL, Roth M, Casini L, Roll JP. Motor and parietal cortical areas both underlie kinaesthesia. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003;16(1):74–82. doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00221-5.
    1. Casini L, Roll JP, Romaiguère P. Relationship between the velocity of illusory hand movement and strength of MEG signals in human primary motor cortex and left angular gyrus. Exp Brain Res. 2008;186(2):349–53. doi: 10.1007/s00221-008-1325-9.
    1. Casini L, Romaiguère P, Ducorps A, Schwartz D, Anton JL, Roll JP. Cortical correlates of illusory hand movement perception in humans: a MEG study. Brain Res. 2006;1121(1):200–6. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.124.
    1. Kavounoudias A, Roll JP, Anton JL, Nazarian B, Roth M, Roll R. Proprio-tactile integration for kinesthetic perception: an fMRI study. Neuropsychologia. 2008;46(2):567–75. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.10.002.
    1. Naito E, Kochiyama T, Kitada R, Nakamura S, Matsumura M, Yonekura Y, et al. Internally simulated movement sensations during motor imagery activate cortical motor areas and the cerebellum. J Neurosci. 2002;22(9):3683–91.
    1. Romaiguère P, Calvin S, Roll JP. Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the sensorimotor cortex alters kinaesthesia. Neuroreport. 2005;16(7):693–7. doi: 10.1097/00001756-200505120-00008.
    1. Ehrsson HH, Geyer S, Naito E. Imagery of voluntary movement of fingers, toes, and tongue activates corresponding body-part-specific motor representations. J Neurophysiol. 2003;90(5):3304–16. doi: 10.1152/jn.01113.2002.
    1. Naito E, Ehrsson HH. Kinesthetic illusion of wrist movement activates motor-related areas. Neuroreport. 2001;12(17):3805–9. doi: 10.1097/00001756-200112040-00041.
    1. Naito E, Ehrsson HH, Geyer S, Zilles K, Roland PE. Illusory arm movements activate cortical motor areas: a positron emission tomography study. J Neurosci. 1999;19(14):6134–44.
    1. Lindenberg R, Nachtigall L, Meinzer M, Sieg MM, Flöel A. Differential effects of dual and unihemispheric motor cortex stimulation in older adults. J Neurosci. 2013;33(21):9176–83. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0055-13.2013.
    1. Nitsche MA, Fricke K, Henschke U, Schlitterlau A, Liebetanz D, Lang N, et al. Pharmacological modulation of cortical excitability shifts induced by transcranial direct current stimulation in humans. J Physiol. 2003;553(Pt 1):293–301. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.049916.
    1. Polanía R, Paulus W, Nitsche MA. Reorganizing the intrinsic functional architecture of the human primary motor cortex during rest with non-invasive cortical stimulation. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e30971. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030971.
    1. Baraduc P, Lang N, Rothwell JC, Wolpert DM. Consolidation of dynamic motor learning is not disrupted by rTMS of primary motor cortex. Curr Biol. 2004;14(3):252–6. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2004.01.033.
    1. Boyd LA, Linsdell MA. Excitatory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to left dorsal premotor cortex enhances motor consolidation of new skills. BMC Neurosci. 2009;10:72. doi: 10.1186/1471-2202-10-72.
    1. Frantseva MV, Fitzgerald PB, Chen R, Moller B, Daigle M, Daskalakis ZJ. Evidence for impaired long-term potentiation in schizophrenia and its relationship to motor skill learning. Cereb Cortex. 2008;18(5):990–6. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhm151.
    1. Kim YH, Park JW, Ko MH, Jang SH, Lee PK. Facilitative effect of high frequency subthreshold repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on complex sequential motor learning in humans. Neurosci Lett. 2004;367(2):181–5. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2004.05.113.
    1. Kim YH, You SH, Ko MH, Park JW, Lee KH, Jang SH, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation-induced corticomotor excitability and associated motor skill acquisition in chronic stroke. Stroke. 2006;37(6):1471–6. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000221233.55497.51.
    1. Kobayashi M, Theoret H, Pascual-Leone A. Suppression of ipsilateral motor cortex facilitates motor skill learning. Eur J Neurosci. 2009;29(4):833–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06628.x.
    1. Stefan K, Wycislo M, Classen J. Modulation of associative human motor cortical plasticity by attention. J Neurophysiol. 2004;92(1):66–72. doi: 10.1152/jn.00383.2003.
    1. Stefan K, Wycislo M, Gentner R, Schramm A, Naumann M, Reiners K, et al. Temporary occlusion of associative motor cortical plasticity by prior dynamic motor training. Cereb Cortex. 2006;16(3):376–85. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhi116.
    1. Ziemann U. TMS induced plasticity in human cortex. Rev Neurosci. 2004;15(4):253–66. doi: 10.1515/REVNEURO.2004.15.4.253.
    1. Pascual-Leone A, Houser CM, Reese K, Shotland LI, Grafman J, Sato S, et al. Safety of rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stimulation in normal volunteers. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1993;89(2):120–30. doi: 10.1016/0168-5597(93)90094-6.
    1. Quartarone A, Morgante F, Bagnato S, Rizzo V, Sant’Angelo A, Aiello E, et al. Long lasting effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor imagery. Neuroreport. 2004;15(8):1287–91. doi: 10.1097/01.wnr.0000127637.22805.7c.
    1. Nowak DA, Grefkes C, Dafotakis M, Eickhoff S, Kust J, Karbe H, et al. Effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the contralesional primary motor cortex on movement kinematics and neural activity in subcortical stroke. Arch Neurol. 2008;65(6):741–7. doi: 10.1001/archneur.65.6.741.
    1. Ziemann U, Siebner HR. Modifying motor learning through gating and homeostatic metaplasticity. Brain Stimul. 2008;1(1):60–6. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2007.08.003.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다