Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Corticomotor control of lumbar erector spinae in postural and voluntary tasks: the influence of transcranial magnetic stimulation current direction

View through CrossRef
Lumbar erector spinae (LES) contribute to spine postural and voluntary control. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) preferentially depolarizes different neural circuits depending on the direction of electrical currents evoked in the brain. Based on recent evidence, posteroanterior current (PA-TMS) and anteroposterior (AP-TMS) current would respectively depolarize neurons in the primary motor cortex (M1) and the premotor cortex. These regions may contribute differently to LES control. This study examined whether responses evoked by PA- and AP-TMS are different during the preparation and execution of LES voluntary and postural tasks.Participants performed a reaction time task. A Warning signal indicated to prepare to flex shoulders (postural, n=15) or to tilt the pelvis (voluntary, n=13) at the Go signal. Single- and paired-pulse TMS (short-interval intracortical inhibition - SICI) were applied using PA- and AP-TMS before the Warning signal (baseline), between the Warning and Go signals (preparation) or 30 ms before the LES onset (execution). Changes from baseline during preparation and execution were calculated in AP/PA-TMS.In the postural task, MEP amplitude was higher during the execution than preparation independently of the current direction (p=0.0002). In the voluntary task, AP-MEP amplitude was higher during execution than preparation (p=0.016). More PA-inhibition (SICI) was observed in execution than in preparation (p=0.028).Different neural circuits are preferentially involved in the two motor tasks assessed, as suggested by different patterns of change in execution of the voluntary task (AP-TMS: increase; PA-TMS: no change). Considering that PA-TMS preferentiallydepolarize neurons in M1,it questions their importance in LES voluntary control.Significance StatementBack muscles fulfill different roles as postural and control involving different neuronal circuits. Manipulating the electrical current direction induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation may allow the examination of different neural circuits contributions to postural and voluntary control of back muscles. In the execution of a postural task, corticospinal excitability was higher for both current directions than preparation. In the voluntary task, the corticospinal excitability was higher during execution than preparation using anteroposterior current only. Neural circuits contribution to back muscles control may depend on their role in the task performed. Our results suggest a minimal involvement of motor cortex neurons (minimally those interacting with posteroanterior current) in voluntary control of back muscles.
Title: Corticomotor control of lumbar erector spinae in postural and voluntary tasks: the influence of transcranial magnetic stimulation current direction
Description:
Lumbar erector spinae (LES) contribute to spine postural and voluntary control.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) preferentially depolarizes different neural circuits depending on the direction of electrical currents evoked in the brain.
Based on recent evidence, posteroanterior current (PA-TMS) and anteroposterior (AP-TMS) current would respectively depolarize neurons in the primary motor cortex (M1) and the premotor cortex.
These regions may contribute differently to LES control.
This study examined whether responses evoked by PA- and AP-TMS are different during the preparation and execution of LES voluntary and postural tasks.
Participants performed a reaction time task.
A Warning signal indicated to prepare to flex shoulders (postural, n=15) or to tilt the pelvis (voluntary, n=13) at the Go signal.
Single- and paired-pulse TMS (short-interval intracortical inhibition - SICI) were applied using PA- and AP-TMS before the Warning signal (baseline), between the Warning and Go signals (preparation) or 30 ms before the LES onset (execution).
Changes from baseline during preparation and execution were calculated in AP/PA-TMS.
In the postural task, MEP amplitude was higher during the execution than preparation independently of the current direction (p=0.
0002).
In the voluntary task, AP-MEP amplitude was higher during execution than preparation (p=0.
016).
More PA-inhibition (SICI) was observed in execution than in preparation (p=0.
028).
Different neural circuits are preferentially involved in the two motor tasks assessed, as suggested by different patterns of change in execution of the voluntary task (AP-TMS: increase; PA-TMS: no change).
Considering that PA-TMS preferentiallydepolarize neurons in M1,it questions their importance in LES voluntary control.
Significance StatementBack muscles fulfill different roles as postural and control involving different neuronal circuits.
Manipulating the electrical current direction induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation may allow the examination of different neural circuits contributions to postural and voluntary control of back muscles.
In the execution of a postural task, corticospinal excitability was higher for both current directions than preparation.
In the voluntary task, the corticospinal excitability was higher during execution than preparation using anteroposterior current only.
Neural circuits contribution to back muscles control may depend on their role in the task performed.
Our results suggest a minimal involvement of motor cortex neurons (minimally those interacting with posteroanterior current) in voluntary control of back muscles.

Related Results

The Effects of Posture and Dynamic Stretching on the Electromechanical Delay of the Paraspinal Muscles
The Effects of Posture and Dynamic Stretching on the Electromechanical Delay of the Paraspinal Muscles
Electromechanical delay (EMD) of muscle is influenced in part by its in-series arrangement with connective tissue. Therefore, studying EMD might provide a better understanding of t...
Reflex control of the spine and posture: a review of the literature from a chiropractic perspective
Reflex control of the spine and posture: a review of the literature from a chiropractic perspective
AbstractObjectiveThis review details the anatomy and interactions of the postural and somatosensory reflexes. We attempt to identify the important role the nervous system plays in ...
Transcranial electrostimulation and magnetic stimulation: modern physiotherapy technologies
Transcranial electrostimulation and magnetic stimulation: modern physiotherapy technologies
The article presents a comprehensive literature review of two non-invasive neuromodulation methods: transcranial electrical stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation. The a...
The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block for Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block for Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Background: The efficacy of erector spinae plane block for thoracoscopic surgery remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the impact of ...
Pain, Function, and Parafunction of the Jaw System in Relation to Neuroplasticity
Pain, Function, and Parafunction of the Jaw System in Relation to Neuroplasticity
Pain and parafunctional behaviour may influence how the jaw motor system functions and adapts. The jaw system provides a relevant model for studying these interactions because of i...

Back to Top