Short Interval Intracortical Inhibition Responses to Low-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Under Multiple Interstimulus Intervals and Conditioning Intensities

Mo Chen, Maíra C. Lixandrão, Cecília N. Prudente, Rebekah L.S. Summers, Teresa J. Kimberley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The extent to which short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) responds to low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) remains inconclusive with reports of increased, decreased and unchanged response following modulation. The aim of this study was to systematically investigate if the variability of SICI following rTMS is explained by the interstimulus interval (ISI) and/or the conditioning stimulus intensity (CSI). Methods: Two experiments with pretesting/posttesting and an rTMS session (1 Hz, 90% RMT, 900 pulses) were done. Experiment I (N = 15): SICI with multiple ISIs (1.0–4.0 msec, 0.2 msec increment). Experiment II (N = 15): SICI with CSIs (50–95% of RMT, 5% increment). In both experiments, the cortical silent period (cSP) was also collected. Results: After low-frequency rTMS, no significant change (p > 0.10) in SICI at any specific ISI or CSI was observed, nor did the optimal ISI or CSI change. However, a significant decrease was observed in SICI responses when assessed under the range of ISIs (p = 0.0001), but not CSIs. cSP inhibition increased significantly (p < 0.0015) for both experiments. Conclusions: The optimal ISI or CSI did not shift or reveal SICI changes after inhibitory rTMS. However, when the whole curve of SICI responses were evaluated from a wide range of ISIs, a decrease in inhibition was found. The contrast between the results of individual ISI tests and the wide range of ISI assessment may be due to higher intersubject variability of SICI and/or sample size, rendering traditional SICI testing methods ineffective for measuring changes in inhibition. Further, it is possible that rTMS modulates GABAA and GABAB mediated inhibitory processes differently, which would explain the conflicting results for SICI and cSP.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)368-375
Number of pages8
JournalNeuromodulation
Volume21
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
For more information on author guidelines, an explanation of our peer review process, and conflict of interest informed consent policies, please go to http:// www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-301854.html Source(s) of financial support: This work was partly supported by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health Award Number UL1TR000114, the University of Minnesota’s MnDRIVE (Minnesota’s Discovery, Research and Innovation Economy) initiative, and São Paulo Foundation (Process no. 2015/16744-4).

Funding Information:
We acknowledge Erin Horwath, Jackie Jaspers, Jon Heimdal, Kory Lutz, Laura Gengler, Taylor Hilbrant, and Katrina Olson for their help with the data collection. This work was partly supported by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health Award Number UL1TR000114, the University of Minnesota’s MnDRIVE (Minnesota’s Discovery, Research and Innovation Economy) initiative, and São Paulo Foundation (Process no. 2015/16744-4).

Funding Information:
We acknowledge Erin Horwath, Jackie Jaspers, Jon Heimdal, Kory Lutz, Laura Gengler, Taylor Hilbrant, and Katrina Olson for their help with the data collection. This work was partly supported by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health Award Number UL1TR000114, the University of Minnesota's MnDRIVE (Minnesota's Discovery, Research and Innovation Economy) initiative, and S?o Paulo Foundation (Process no. 2015/16744-4).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 International Neuromodulation Society

Keywords

  • Conditioning intensity
  • interstimulus interval
  • neuromodulation
  • short interval intracortical inhibition
  • transcranial magnetic stimulation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Short Interval Intracortical Inhibition Responses to Low-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Under Multiple Interstimulus Intervals and Conditioning Intensities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this