7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Agonist-Antagonist Coactivation Enhances Corticomotor Excitability of Ankle Muscles

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Spinal pathways underlying reciprocal flexion-extension contractions have been well characterized, but the extent to which cortically evoked motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) are influenced by antagonist muscle activation remains unclear. A majority of studies using transcranial magnetic stimulation- (TMS-) evoked MEPs to evaluate the excitability of the corticospinal pathway focus on upper extremity muscles. Due to functional and neural control differences between lower and upper limb muscles, there is a need to evaluate methodological factors influencing TMS-evoked MEPs specifically in lower limb musculature. If and to what extent the activation of the nontargeted muscles, such as antagonists, affects TMS-evoked MEPs is poorly understood, and such gaps in our knowledge may limit the rigor and reproducibility of TMS studies. Here, we evaluated the effect of the activation state of the antagonist muscle on TMS-evoked MEPs obtained from the target (agonist) ankle muscle for both tibialis anterior (TA) and soleus muscles. Fourteen able-bodied participants (11 females, age: 26.1 ± 4.1 years) completed one experimental session; data from 12 individuals were included in the analysis. TMS was delivered during 4 conditions: rest, TA activated, soleus activated, and TA and soleus coactivation. Three pairwise comparisons were made for MEP amplitude and coefficient of variability (CV): rest versus coactivation, rest versus antagonist activation, and agonist activation versus coactivation. We demonstrated that agonist-antagonist coactivation enhanced MEP amplitude and reduced MEP CVs for both TA and soleus muscles. Our results provide methodological considerations for future TMS studies and pave the way for future exploration of coactivation-dependent modulation of corticomotor excitability in pathological cohorts such as stroke or spinal cord injury.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Neuromechanical principles underlying movement modularity and their implications for rehabilitation.

          Neuromechanical principles define the properties and problems that shape neural solutions for movement. Although the theoretical and experimental evidence is debated, we present arguments for consistent structures in motor patterns, i.e., motor modules, that are neuromechanical solutions for movement particular to an individual and shaped by evolutionary, developmental, and learning processes. As a consequence, motor modules may be useful in assessing sensorimotor deficits specific to an individual and define targets for the rational development of novel rehabilitation therapies that enhance neural plasticity and sculpt motor recovery. We propose that motor module organization is disrupted and may be improved by therapy in spinal cord injury, stroke, and Parkinson's disease. Recent studies provide insights into the yet-unknown underlying neural mechanisms of motor modules, motor impairment, and motor learning and may lead to better understanding of the causal nature of modularity and its underlying neural substrates.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Corticospinal activity evoked and modulated by non-invasive stimulation of the intact human motor cortex.

            A number of methods have been developed recently that stimulate the human brain non-invasively through the intact scalp. The most common are transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial electric stimulation (TES) and transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS). They are widely used to probe function and connectivity of brain areas as well as therapeutically in a variety of conditions such as depression or stroke. They are much less focal than conventional invasive methods which use small electrodes placed on or in the brain and are often thought to activate all classes of neurones in the stimulated area. However, this is not true. A large body of evidence from experiments on the motor cortex shows that non-invasive methods of brain stimulation can be surprisingly selective and that adjusting the intensity and direction of stimulation can activate different classes of inhibitory and excitatory inputs to the corticospinal output cells. Here we review data that have elucidated the action of TMS and TES, concentrating mainly on the most direct evidence available from spinal epidural recordings of the descending corticospinal volleys. The results show that it is potentially possible to test and condition specific neural circuits in motor cortex that could be affected differentially by disease, or be used in different forms of natural behaviour. However, there is substantial interindividual variability in the specificity of these protocols. Perhaps in the future it will be possible, with the advances currently being made to model the electrical fields induced in individual brains, to develop forms of stimulation that can reliably target more specific populations of neurones, and open up the internal circuitry of the motor cortex for study in behaving humans.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Short- and long-term changes in joint co-contraction associated with motor learning as revealed from surface EMG.

              In the field of motor control, two hypotheses have been controversial: whether the brain acquires internal models that generate accurate motor commands, or whether the brain avoids this by using the viscoelasticity of musculoskeletal system. Recent observations on relatively low stiffness during trained movements support the existence of internal models. However, no study has revealed the decrease in viscoelasticity associated with learning that would imply improvement of internal models as well as synergy between the two hypothetical mechanisms. Previously observed decreases in electromyogram (EMG) might have other explanations, such as trajectory modifications that reduce joint torques. To circumvent such complications, we required strict trajectory control and examined only successful trials having identical trajectory and torque profiles. Subjects were asked to perform a hand movement in unison with a target moving along a specified and unusual trajectory, with shoulder and elbow in the horizontal plane at the shoulder level. To evaluate joint viscoelasticity during the learning of this movement, we proposed an index of muscle co-contraction around the joint (IMCJ). The IMCJ was defined as the summation of the absolute values of antagonistic muscle torques around the joint and computed from the linear relation between surface EMG and joint torque. The IMCJ during isometric contraction, as well as during movements, was confirmed to correlate well with joint stiffness estimated using the conventional method, i.e., applying mechanical perturbations. Accordingly, the IMCJ during the learning of the movement was computed for each joint of each trial using estimated EMG-torque relationship. At the same time, the performance error for each trial was specified as the root mean square of the distance between the target and hand at each time step over the entire trajectory. The time-series data of IMCJ and performance error were decomposed into long-term components that showed decreases in IMCJ in accordance with learning with little change in the trajectory and short-term interactions between the IMCJ and performance error. A cross-correlation analysis and impulse responses both suggested that higher IMCJs follow poor performances, and lower IMCJs follow good performances within a few successive trials. Our results support the hypothesis that viscoelasticity contributes more when internal models are inaccurate, while internal models contribute more after the completion of learning. It is demonstrated that the CNS regulates viscoelasticity on a short- and long-term basis depending on performance error and finally acquires smooth and accurate movements while maintaining stability during the entire learning process.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Neural Plast
                Neural Plast
                NP
                Neural Plasticity
                Hindawi
                2090-5904
                1687-5443
                2019
                3 September 2019
                : 2019
                : 5190671
                Affiliations
                1Division of Physical Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
                2Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School and Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, USA
                3Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
                4Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
                5Department of Physiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
                6Center for Visual and Neurocognitive Rehabilitation, Atlanta Veterans Affair Health Care System, Decatur, GA, USA
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Victor Anggono

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6436-1487
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0469-6282
                Article
                10.1155/2019/5190671
                6745152
                ed3bec88-fbe2-4e00-b55c-1a9a92586afd
                Copyright © 2019 Trisha M. Kesar et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 April 2019
                : 31 July 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: China Scholarship Council
                Award ID: 201706165058
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health
                Award ID: U01NS091951
                Award ID: U10NS086607
                Award ID: 5R24HD050821-11
                Award ID: K12HD055931
                Award ID: K01HD079584
                Categories
                Research Article

                Neurosciences
                Neurosciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article