Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

No trace of phase: Corticomotor excitability is not tuned by phase of pericentral mu-rhythm

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Cochlear implant should not be absolute contraindication for electroconvulsive therapy and transcranial magnetic stimulation

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Guidelines for TMS/tES Clinical Services and Research through the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Probing EEG activity in the targeted cortex after focal transcranial electrical stimulation

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Structural changes induced by electroconvulsive therapy are associated with clinical outcome

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  5. Comment: Does TMS of the precentral motor hand knob primarily stimulate the dorsal premotor cortex or the primary motor hand area?

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateResearchpeer-review

  1. Cerebellar - premotor cortex interactions underlying visuomotor adaptation

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Accurate and robust whole-head segmentation from magnetic resonance images for individualized head modeling

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Maintenance of muscle strength following a one-year resistance training program in older adults

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: The motor potentials evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the motor hand area (M1-HAND) show substantial inter-trial variability. Pericentral mu-rhythm oscillations, might contribute to inter-trial variability. Recent studies targeting mu-activity based on real-time electroencephalography (EEG) reported an influence of mu-power and mu-phase on the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in a preselected group with strong pericentral mu-activity. Other studies that determined mu-power or mu-phase based on post-hoc trial sorting according in non-preselected individuals were largely negative.

OBJECTIVES: To reassess if cortico-spinal activity is modulated by the mu-rhythm, we applied single-pulse TMS to the M1-HAND conditional on the phase of the intrinsically expressed pericentral mu-rhythm in 14 non-preselected healthy young participants.

METHODS: TMS was given at 0, 90, 180, and 270° of the mu-phase. Based on the absence of effects of mu-phase or mu-power when analyzing the mean MEP amplitudes, we also computed a linear mixed effects model, which included mu-phase, mu-power, inter-stimulus interval (ISIs) as fixed effects, treating the subject factor as a random effect.

RESULTS: Mixed model analysis revealed a significant effect of mu-power and ISI, but no effect of mu-phase and no interactions. MEP amplitude scaled linearly with lower mu-power or longer ISIs, but these modulatory effects were very small relative to inter-trial MEP variability.

CONCLUSION: Our largely negative results are in agreement with previous offline TMS-EEG studies and point to a possible influence of ISI. Future research needs to clarify under which circumstances the responsiveness of human the M1-HAND to TMS depends on the synchronicity with mu-power and mu-phase.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBrain Stimulation
Volume12
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)1261-1270
Number of pages10
ISSN1935-861X
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2019

    Research areas

  • EEG-Triggered phase targeting, Electroencephalography, Mu rhythm, Pericentral oscillation, Temporal and spatial neuronavigation, Transcranial magnetic stimulation

ID: 57329071