Published July 11, 2022
| Version 2
Journal article
Open
Local brain-state dependency of effective connectivity: a pilot TMS–EEG study
Authors/Creators
- 1. BioMag Laboratory, HUS Medical Imaging Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
- 2. School of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
- 3. Center for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- 4. Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences "L. Sacco", University of Milan, Milan, Italy
Description
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.
Files
openreseurope-2-16165.pdf
Additional details
References
- Ferrarelli F, Massimini M, Sarasso S (2010). Breakdown in cortical effective connectivity during midazolam-induced loss of consciousness. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. doi:10.1073/pnas.0913008107
- Kundu B, Johnson JS, Postle BR (2014). Prestimulation phase predicts the TMS-evoked response. J Neurophysiol. doi:10.1152/jn.00390.2013
- Mäki H, Ilmoniemi RJ (2010). EEG oscillations and magnetically evoked motor potentials reflect motor system excitability in overlapping neuronal populations. Clin Neurophysiol. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.11.078
- Massimini M, Ferrarelli F, Huber R (2005). Breakdown of cortical effective connectivity during sleep. Science. doi:10.1126/science.1117256
- Nikulin VV, Kičić D, Kähkönen S (2003). Modulation of electroencephalographic responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation: evidence for changes in cortical excitability related to movement. Eur J Neurosci. doi:10.1046/j.1460-9568.2003.02858.x
- Sarasso S, Boly M, Napolitani M (2015). Consciousness and complexity during unresponsiveness induced by propofol, xenon, and ketamine. Curr Biol. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.10.014
- Silvanto J, Cattaneo Z (2021). Nonlinear interaction between stimulation intensity and initial brain state: Evidence for the facilitatory/suppressive range model of online TMS effects. Neurosci Lett. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2020.135538
- Stefanou MI, Baur D, Belardinelli P (2019). Brain state-dependent brain stimulation with real-time electroencephalography-triggered transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Vis Exp. doi:10.3791/59711
- Zrenner C, Desideri D, Belardinelli P (2018). Real-time EEG-defined excitability states determine efficacy of TMS-induced plasticity in human motor cortex. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2017.11.016
- Silvanto J, Pascual-Leone A (2008). State-dependency of transcranial magnetic stimulation. Brain Topogr. doi:10.1007/s10548-008-0067-0
- Ilmoniemi R, Sarvas J (2019). Brain signals: physics and mathematics of MEG and EEG.
- Mutanen TP, Nieminen JO, Ilmoniemi RJ (2013). TMS-evoked changes in brain-state dynamics quantified by using EEG data. Front Hum Neurosci. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00155
- Bergmann TO, Lieb A, Zrenner C (2019). Pulsed Facilitation of Corticospinal Excitability by the Sensorimotor μ-Alpha Rhythm. J Neurosci. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1730-19.2019
- Desideri D, Zrenner C, Ziemann U (2019). Phase of sensorimotor μ-oscillation modulates cortical responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human motor cortex. J Physiol. doi:10.1113/JP278638
- Ziemann U, Siebner HR (2015). Inter-subject and inter-session variability of plasticity induction by non-invasive brain stimulation: boon or bane?. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2015.01.409
- Bergmann TO (2018). Brain State-Dependent Brain Stimulation. Front Psychol. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02108
- Koponen LM, Nieminen JO, Ilmoniemi RJ (2018). Multi-locus transcranial magnetic stimulation-theory and implementation. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2018.03.014
- Navarro de Lara LI, Daneshzand M, Mascarenas A (2021). A 3-axis coil design for multichannel TMS arrays. NeuroImage. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117355
- Nieminen JO, Koponen LM, Mäkelä N (2019). Short-interval intracortical inhibition in human primary motor cortex: A multi-locus transcranial magnetic stimulation study. NeuroImage. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116194
- Tadayonnejad R, Wilson AC, Corlier J (2020). Sequential multi-locus transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder with comorbid major depression: A case series. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2020.10.003
- Tervo AE, Metsomaa J, Nieminen JO (2020). Automated search of stimulation targets with closed-loop transcranial magnetic stimulation. NeuroImage. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117082
- Thut G, Bergmann TO, Fröhlich F (2017). Guiding transcranial brain stimulation by EEG/MEG to interact with ongoing brain activity and associated functions: A position paper. Clin Neurophysiol. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2017.01.003
- Ziemann U, Romani GL, Ilmoniemi RJ (2019). "ConnectToBrain": Synergy-Projekt zur Closed-loop-Stimulationstherapie von Netzwerkerkrankungen des Gehirns. Nervenarzt. doi:10.1007/s00115-019-0747-x
- Zrenner C, Galevska D, Nieminen JO (2020). The shaky ground truth of real-time phase estimation. NeuroImage. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116761
- Zrenner C, Belardinelli P, Müller-Dahlhaus F (2016). Closed-loop neuroscience and non-invasive brain stimulation: A tale of two loops. Front Cell Neurosci. doi:10.3389/fncel.2016.00092
- Tervo AE, Nieminen JO, Lioumis P (2022). Closed-loop optimization of transcranial magnetic stimulation with electroencephalography feedback. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2022.01.016
- Schaworonkow N, Gordon PC, Belardinelli P (2018). μ-Rhythm extracted with personalized EEG filters correlates with corticospinal excitability in real-time phase-triggered EEG-TMS. Front Neurosci. doi:10.3389/fnins.2018.00954
- Torrecillos F, Falato E, Pogosyan A (2020). Motor cortex inputs at the optimum phase of beta cortical oscillations undergo more rapid and less variable corticospinal propagation. J Neurosci. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1953-19.2019
- Hussain SJ, Claudino L, Bönstrup M (2019). Sensorimotor Oscillatory Phase-Power Interaction Gates Resting Human Corticospinal Output. Cereb Cortex. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhy255
- Thies M, Zrenner C, Ziemann U (2018). Sensorimotor mu-alpha power is positively related to corticospinal excitability. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2018.06.006
- Baur D, Galevska D, Hussain S (2020). Induction of LTD-like corticospinal plasticity by low-frequency rTMS depends on pre-stimulus phase of sensorimotor μ-rhythm. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2020.09.005
- Kičić D, Lioumis P, Ilmoniemi RJ (2008). Bilateral changes in excitability of sensorimotor cortices during unilateral movement: Combined electroencephalographic and transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Neuroscience. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.01.043
- Rocchi L, Di Santo A, Brown K (2021). Disentangling EEG responses to TMS due to cortical and peripheral activations. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2020.10.011
- Rosanova M, Casali A, Bellina V (2009). Natural frequencies of human corticothalamic circuits. J Neurosci. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0445-09.2009
- Russo S, Sarasso S, Puglisi GE (2022). TAAC - TMS Adaptable Auditory Control: a universal tool to mask TMS clicks. J Neurosci Methods. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2022.109491
- Virtanen J, Ruohonen J, Näätänen R (1999). Instrumentation for the measurement of electric brain responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation. Med Biol Eng Comput. doi:10.1007/BF02513307
- Reijonen J, Pitkänen M, Kallioniemi E (2020). Spatial extent of cortical motor hotspot in navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Neurosci Methods. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2020.108893
- Wang J, Meng HJ, Ji GJ (2020). Finger tapping task activation vs. TMS hotspot: different locations and networks. Brain Topogr. doi:10.1007/s10548-019-00741-9
- Conforto AB, Z'Graggen WJ, Kohl AS (2004). Impact of coil position and electrophysiological monitoring on determination of motor thresholds to transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2003.11.010
- Fecchio M, Pigorini A, Comanducci A (2017). The spectral features of EEG responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex depend on the amplitude of the motor evoked potentials. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0184910
- Casarotto S, Fecchio M, Rosanova M (2022). The rt-TEP tool: real-time visualization of TMS-Evoked Potentials to maximize cortical activation and minimize artifacts. J Neurosci Methods. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2022.109486
- Hannula H, Ilmoniemi RJ (2017). Basic Principles of Navigated TMS. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54918-7_1
- Ferrarelli F, Massimini M, Peterson MJ (2008). Reduced evoked gamma oscillations in the frontal cortex in schizophrenia patients: A TMS/EEG study. Am J Psychiatry. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111733
- Casarotto S, Turco F, Comanducci A (2019). Excitability of the supplementary motor area in Parkinson's disease depends on subcortical damage. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2018.10.011
- Delorme A, Makeig S (2004). EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009
- Bergmann TO, Mölle M, Schmidt MA (2012). EEG-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation reveals rapid shifts in motor cortical excitability during the human sleep slow oscillation. J Neurosci. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4792-11.2012
- Kruglikov SY, Schiff J (2003). Interplay of electroencephalogram phase and auditory-evoked neural activity. J Neurosci. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-31-10122.2003
- Komssi S, Kähkönen S, Ilmoniemi RJ (2004). The effect of stimulus intensity on brain responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Hum Brain Mapp. doi:10.1002/hbm.10159
- Lehmann D, Skrandies W (1980). Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. doi:10.1016/0013-4694(80)90419-8
- Holmes AP, Blair RC, Watson JD (1996). Nonparametric analysis of statistic images from functional mapping experiments. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. doi:10.1097/00004647-199601000-00002
- Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol.
- Hämäläinen MS, Ilmoniemi RJ (1994). Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates. Med Biol Eng Comput. doi:10.1007/BF02512476
- Nielsen JD, Madsen KH, Puonti O (2018). Automatic skull segmentation from MR images for realistic volume conductor models of the head: Assessment of the state-of-the-art. NeuroImage. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.03.001
- Ashburner J, Friston KJ (2005). Unified segmentation. NeuroImage. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.018
- Huang Y, Dmochowski JP, Su Y (2013). Automated MRI segmentation for individualized modeling of current flow in the human head. J Neural Eng. doi:10.1088/1741-2560/10/6/066004
- Thielscher A, Antunes A, Saturnino GB (2015). Field modeling for transcranial magnetic stimulation: A useful tool to understand the physiological effects of TMS?. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. doi:10.1109/EMBC.2015.7318340
- Tran AP, Yan S, Fang Q (2020). Improving model-based functional near-infrared spectroscopy analysis using mesh-based anatomical and light-transport models. Neurophotonics. doi:10.1117/1.NPh.7.1.015008
- Stenroos M, Nummenmaa A (2016). Incorporating and compensating cerebrospinal fluid in surface-based forward models of magneto- and electroencephalography. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159595
- Maris E, Fries P, van Ede F (2016). Diverse phase relations among neuronal rhythms and their potential function. Trends Neurosci. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2015.12.004
- Kleinman K, Huang SS (2017). Calculating power by bootstrap, with an application to cluster-randomized trials. EGEMS (Wash DC). doi:10.13063/2327-9214.1202
- Zazio A, Miniussi C, Bortoletto M (2021). Alpha-band cortico-cortical phase synchronization is associated with effective connectivity in the motor network. Clin Neurophysiol. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2021.06.025
- Stefanou MI, Desideri D, Belardinelli CZ (2018). Phase synchronicity of μ-rhythm determines efficacy of interhemispheric communication between human motor cortices. J Neurosci. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1470-18.2018
- Sauseng P, Klimesch W, Gerloff C (2009). Spontaneous locally restricted EEG alpha activity determines cortical excitability in the motor cortex. Neuropsychologia. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.07.021
- Ferreri F, Vecchio F, Ponzo D (2014). Time-varying coupling of EEG oscillations predicts excitability fluctuations in the primary motor cortex as reflected by motor evoked potentials amplitude: An EEG-TMS study. Hum Brain Mapp. doi:10.1002/hbm.22306
- Madsen KH, Karabanov AN, Krohne LG (2019). No trace of phase: Corticomotor excitability is not tuned by phase of pericentral mu-rhythm. Brain Stimul. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2019.05.005