Disinhibitory shift of recovery curve of somatosensory-evoked response in elderly: A magnetoencephalographic study

OBJECTIVE The aim of the study was to investigate the functional differences between N20m and P30m components of somatosensory-evoked magnetic cortical field (SEF) in young and senior subjects. METHODS Twenty-nine healthy subjects, 13 younger (mean age: 21.8years) and 16 senior (63.8 years), participated. Magnetic fields were measured using a 160-channel, whole head MEG. Single- and paired-pulse stimulations of 200 artifact-free MEG signal epochs were averaged separately. We calculated how aging affects recovery function of SEFs. RESULTS The senior showed a prolonged N20m peak latency compared to the younger, although the P30m peak latency was not significantly different between groups. The N20m ratios at 60 and 80 ms in the senior were significantly increased compared to the ratios in the younger (60 ms: P<0.05, 80 ms: P<0.001). The P30m ratios at inter-stimulus interval (ISI) of 80 and 100 ms showed even disinhibition in the senior than in the younger (P<0.05). The younger also showed a significantly negative correlation between P30m and N20m components' recovery curves (R=0.72, P<0.05). CONCLUSION Aging-related changes that occurred in recovery functioning were the decrease in N20m component suppression and the increase in P30m component recovery, indicating that the N20m and P30m components have different functions in aging-related recovery changes. SIGNIFICANCE Our results show that the N20m ratio at an ISI of 80 ms was significantly increased in the senior group, indicating that the second stimulus-evoked SEF was less inhibited by the initial stimulus at this ISI, suggesting less refractory effect or increased disinhibition.

[1]  H Suzuki,et al.  Effects of tactile interference stimulation on somatosensory evoked magnetic fields following tibial nerve stimulation. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[2]  Hubert R. Dinse,et al.  Increased Excitability of Somatosensory Cortex in Aged Humans is Associated with Impaired Tactile Acuity , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  H. Ashida,et al.  Somatosensory evoked potential recovery in myotonic dystrophy , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[4]  Jeffrey W. Cooney,et al.  Top-down suppression deficit underlies working memory impairment in normal aging , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[5]  Ryusuke Kakigi,et al.  Correspondence between short-latency somatosensory evoked brain potentials and cortical magnetic fields following median nerve stimulation , 2001, Brain Research.

[6]  W. Wiederholt,et al.  Recovery function of short-latency components of the human somatosensory evoked potential. , 1983, Archives of neurology.

[7]  Patrick Ragert,et al.  Sustained increase of somatosensory cortex excitability by tactile coactivation studied by paired median nerve stimulation in humans correlates with perceptual gain , 2007, The Journal of physiology.

[8]  W. Penfield,et al.  SOMATIC MOTOR AND SENSORY REPRESENTATION IN THE CEREBRAL CORTEX OF MAN AS STUDIED BY ELECTRICAL STIMULATION , 1937 .

[9]  R Kakigi,et al.  Effects of sleep on somatosensory evoked responses in human: a magnetoencephalographic study. , 1996, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[10]  H Shibasaki,et al.  Effects of age, gender, and stimulus side on the scalp topography of somatosensory evoked potentials following posterior tibial nerve stimulation. , 1991, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[11]  T. Yamada,et al.  Recovery functions of fast frequency potentials in the initial negative wave of median SEP. , 1991, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[12]  C C Wood,et al.  Developmental and aging changes in somatosensory, auditory and visual evoked potentials. , 1984, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[13]  I. Kanazawa,et al.  Somatosensory evoked potential recovery (SEP-R) in various neurological disorders. , 1995, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Somatically Evoked Magnetic Fields of the Human Brain , 1978, Science.

[15]  Ryusuke Kakigi,et al.  Two evoked responses with different recovery functions in the primary somatosensory cortex in humans , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[16]  J. Sarvas.  Basic mathematical and electromagnetic concepts of the biomagnetic inverse problem. , 1987, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Effects of interstimulus interval on somatosensory evoked magnetic fields (SEFs): a hypothesis concerning SEF generation at the primary sensorimotor cortex. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[18]  W C Wiederholt,et al.  Recovery function of short latency components of surface and depth recorded somatosensory evoked potentials in the cat. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  H. Dinse,et al.  Effects of Aging on Paired-Pulse Behavior of Rat Somatosensory Cortical Neurons , 2009, Cerebral cortex.

[20]  Julia M. Stephen,et al.  Aging changes and gender differences in response to median nerve stimulation measured with MEG , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[21]  C. Shagass,et al.  RECOVERY FUNCTIONS OF HUMAN SOMATOSENSORY AND VISUAL EVOKED POTENTIALS * , 1964, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.