Search

Publisher Copyright: © 2022 Granö I et al. Background: Spontaneous cortical oscillations have been shown to modulate cortical responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). However, whether these oscillations influence cortical effective connectivity is largely unknown. We conducted a pilot study to set the basis for addressing how spontaneous oscillations affect cortical effective connectivity measured through TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs). Methods: We applied TMS to the left primary motor cortex and right pre-supplementary motor area of three subjects while recording EEG. We classified trials off-line into positive- and negative-phase classes according to the mu and beta rhythms. We calculated differences in the global mean-field amplitude (GMFA) and compared the cortical spreading of the TMS-evoked activity between the two classes. Results: Phase affected the GMFA in four out of 12 datasets (3 subjects × 2 stimulation sites × 2 frequency bands). Two of the observed significant intervals were before 50 ms, two between 50 and 100 ms, and one after 100 ms post-stimulus. Source estimates showed complex spatial differences between the classes in the cortical spreading of the TMS-evoked activity. Conclusions: TMS-evoked effective connectivity seems to depend on the phase of local cortical oscillations at the stimulated site. This work paves the way to design future closed-loop stimulation paradigms.

Funding Information: This project had received funding from the Academy of Finland (Decision Nos. 265680, 294625, 306845, 308265, and 341361) and EraNet Neuron ACROBAT. Publisher Copyright: Copyright © 2022 Nieminen, Pospelov, Koponen, Yrjölä, Shulga, Khirug and Rivera. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is widely applied on humans for research and clinical purposes. TMS studies on small animals, e.g., rodents, can provide valuable knowledge of the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms. Administering TMS on small animals is, however, prone to technical difficulties, mainly due to their small head size. In this study, we aimed to develop an energy-efficient coil and a compatible experimental set-up for administering TMS on rodents. We applied a convex optimization process to develop a minimum-energy coil for TMS on rats. As the coil windings of the optimized coil extend to a wide region, we designed and manufactured a holder on which the rat lies upside down, with its head supported by the coil. We used the set-up to record TMS–electromyography, with electromyography recorded from limb muscles with intramuscular electrodes. The upside-down placement of the rat allowed the operator to easily navigate the TMS without the coil blocking their field of view. With this paradigm, we obtained consistent motor evoked potentials from all tested animals.

openaire: EC/H2020/810377/EU//ConnectToBrain Funding Information: This research has received funding from the Academy of Finland (Decisions No. 255347, 265680, 294625, and 306845), the Finnish Cultural Foundation, Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, Erasmus Mundus SMART2 (No. 552042-EM-1-2014-1-FR-ERA MUNDUSEMA2), the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient?fico e Tecnol?gico (CNPq; grant number 140787/2014-3), the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 810377), and the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics (FAPESP; grant number 2013/07699-0). Background: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coils allow only a slow, mechanical adjustment of the stimulating electric field (E-field) orientation in the cerebral tissue. Fast E-field control is needed to synchronize the stimulation with the ongoing brain activity. Also, empirical models that fully describe the relationship between evoked responses and the stimulus orientation and intensity are still missing. Objective: We aimed to (1) develop a TMS transducer for manipulating the E-field orientation electronically with high accuracy at the neuronally meaningful millisecond-level time scale and (2) devise and validate a physiologically based model describing the orientation selectivity of neuronal excitability. Methods: We designed and manufactured a two-coil TMS transducer. The coil windings were computed with a minimum-energy optimization procedure, and the transducer was controlled with our custom-made electronics. The electronic E-field control was verified with a TMS characterizer. The motor evoked potential amplitude and latency of a hand muscle were mapped in 3° steps of the stimulus orientation in 16 healthy subjects for three stimulation intensities. We fitted a logistic model to the motor response amplitude. Results: The two-coil TMS transducer allows one to manipulate the pulse orientation accurately without manual coil movement. The motor response amplitude followed a logistic function of the stimulus orientation; this dependency was strongly affected by the stimulus intensity. Conclusion: The developed electronic control of the E-field orientation allows exploring new stimulation paradigms and probing neuronal mechanisms. The presented model helps to disentangle the neuronal mechanisms of brain function and guide future non-invasive stimulation protocols.

openaire: EC/H2020/810377/EU//ConnectToBrain Funding Information: This project has received funding from the Finnish Cultural Foundation , Academy of Finland (decisions No. 294625 , 306845 , and 327326 ), Instrumentarium Science Foundation , Emil Aaltonen Foundation , Finnish Science Foundation for Technology and Economics , Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation , and European Research Council (ERC Synergy) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (ConnectToBrain; grant agreement No. 810377 ). Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s) Background: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is widely used in brain research and treatment of various brain dysfunctions. However, the optimal way to target stimulation and administer TMS therapies, for example, where and in which electric field direction the stimuli should be given, is yet to be determined. Objective: To develop an automated closed-loop system for adjusting TMS parameters (in this work, the stimulus orientation) online based on TMS-evoked brain activity measured with electroencephalography (EEG). Methods: We developed an automated closed-loop TMS–EEG set-up. In this set-up, the stimulus parameters are electronically adjusted with multi-locus TMS. As a proof of concept, we developed an algorithm that automatically optimizes the stimulation orientation based on single-trial EEG responses. We applied the algorithm to determine the electric field orientation that maximizes the amplitude of the TMS–EEG responses. The validation of the algorithm was performed with six healthy volunteers, repeating the search twenty times for each subject. Results: The validation demonstrated that the closed-loop control worked as desired despite the large variation in the single-trial EEG responses. We were often able to get close to the orientation that maximizes the EEG amplitude with only a few tens of pulses. Conclusion: Optimizing stimulation with EEG feedback in a closed-loop manner is feasible and enables effective coupling to brain activity.

openaire: EC/H2020/810377/EU//ConnectToBrain Besides stimulus intensities and interstimulus intervals (ISI), the electric field (E-field) orientation is known to affect both short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and facilitation (SICF) in paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). However, it has yet to be established how distinct orientations of the conditioning (CS) and test stimuli (TS) affect the SICI and SICF generation. With the use of a multi-channel TMS transducer that provides electronic control of the stimulus orientation and intensity, we aimed to investigate how changes in the CS and TS orientation affect the strength of SICI and SICF. We hypothesized that the CS orientation would play a major role for SICF than for SICI, whereas the CS intensity would be more critical for SICI than for SICF. In eight healthy subjects, we tested two ISIs (1.5 and 2.7 ms), two CS and TS orientations (anteromedial (AM) and posteromedial (PM)), and four CS intensities (50, 70, 90, and 110% of the resting motor threshold (RMT)). The TS intensity was fixed at 110% RMT. The intensities were adjusted to the corresponding RMT in the AM and PM orientations. SICI and SICF were observed in all tested CS and TS orientations. SICI depended on the CS intensity in a U-shaped manner in any combination of the CS and TS orientations. With 70% and 90% RMT CS intensities, stronger PM-oriented CS induced stronger inhibition than weaker AM-oriented CS. Similar SICF was observed for any CS orientation. Neither SICI nor SICF depended on the TS orientation. We demonstrated that SICI and SICF could be elicited by the CS perpendicular to the TS, which indicates that these stimuli affected either overlapping or strongly connected neuronal populations. We concluded that SICI is primarily sensitive to the CS intensity and that CS intensity adjustment resulted in similar SICF for different CS orientations.

Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Tugin et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Besides stimulus intensities and interstimulus intervals (ISI), the electric field (E-field) orientation is known to affect both short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and facilitation (SICF) in paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). However, it has yet to be established how distinct orientations of the conditioning (CS) and test stimuli (TS) affect the SICI and SICF generation. With the use of a multi-channel TMS transducer that provides electronic control of the stimulus orientation and intensity, we aimed to investigate how changes in the CS and TS orientation affect the strength of SICI and SICF. We hypothesized that the CS orientation would play a major role for SICF than for SICI, whereas the CS intensity would be more critical for SICI than for SICF. In eight healthy subjects, we tested two ISIs (1.5 and 2.7 ms), two CS and TS orientations (anteromedial (AM) and posteromedial (PM)), and four CS intensities (50, 70, 90, and 110% of the resting motor threshold (RMT)). The TS intensity was fixed at 110% RMT. The intensities were adjusted to the corresponding RMT in the AM and PM orientations. SICI and SICF were observed in all tested CS and TS orientations. SICI depended on the CS intensity in a U-shaped manner in any combination of the CS and TS orientations. With 70% and 90% RMT CS intensities, stronger PM-oriented CS induced stronger inhibition than weaker AM-oriented CS. Similar SICF was observed for any CS orientation. Neither SICI nor SICF depended on the TS orientation. We demonstrated that SICI and SICF could be elicited by the CS perpendicular to the TS, which indicates that these stimuli affected either overlapping or strongly connected neuronal populations. We concluded that SICI is primarily sensitive to the CS intensity and that CS intensity adjustment resulted in similar SICF for different CS orientations.