Preferential activation of different I waves by transcranial magnetic stimulation with a figure-of-eight-shaped coil

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the human primary motor cortex (M1) evokes motor responses in the contralateral limb muscles. The latencies and amplitudes of those responses depend on the direction of induced current in the brain by the stimuli (Mills et al. 1992, Werhahn et al. 1994). This observation suggests that different neural elements might be activated by the differently directed induced currents. Using a figure-of-eight-shaped coil, which induces current with a certain direction, we analyzed the effect of direction of stimulating current on the latencies of responses to TMS in normal subjects. The latencies were measured from surface electromyographic responses of the first dorsal interosseous muscles and the peaks in the peristimulus time histograms (PSTHs) of single motor units from the same muscles. The coil was placed over the M1, with eight different directions each separated by 45°. Stimulus intensity was adjusted just above the motor threshold while subjects made a weak tonic voluntary contraction, so that we can analyse the most readily elicited descending volley in the pyramidal tracts. In most subjects, TMS with medially and anteriorly directed current in the brain produced responses or a peak that occurred some 1.5 ms later than those to anodal electrical stimulation. In contrast, TMS with laterally and posteriorly directed current produced responses or a peak that occurred about 4.5 ms later. There was a single peak in most of PSTHs under the above stimulation condition, whereas there were occasionally two peaks under the transitional current directions between the above two groups. These results suggest that TMS with medially and anteriorly directed current in the brain readily elicits I1 waves, whereas that with laterally and posteriorly directed current preferentially elicits I3 waves. Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies indicated that this direction was related to the course of the central sulcus. TMS with induced current flowing forward relative to the central sulcus preferentially elicited I1 waves and that flowing backward elicited I3 waves. Our finding of the dependence of preferentially activated I waves on the current direction in the brain suggests that different sets of cortical neurons are responsible for different I waves, and are contrarily oriented. The present method using a figure-of-eight-shaped coil must enable us to study physiological characteristics of each I wave separately and, possibly, analyse different neural elements in M1, since it activates a certain I wave selectively without D waves or other I waves.

[1]  V. Amassian,et al.  Single and multiple-unit analysis of cortical stage of pyramidal tract activation. , 1954, Journal of neurophysiology.

[2]  D. Kernell,et al.  Responses of the pyramidal tract to stimulation of the baboon's motor cortex , 1967, The Journal of physiology.

[3]  V E Amassian,et al.  An analysis of the activation of motor cortical neurons by surface stimulation. , 1967, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  W. D. Thompson,et al.  Excitation of pyramidal tract cells by intracortical microstimulation: effective extent of stimulating current. , 1968, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  E Jankowska,et al.  The mode of activation of pyramidal tract cells by intracortical stimuli. , 1975, The Journal of physiology.

[6]  H C Kwan,et al.  Spatial organization of precentral cortex in awake primates. II. Motor outputs. , 1978, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  J. Murphy,et al.  Spatial organization of precentral cortex in awake primates. III. Input-output coupling. , 1978, Journal of neurophysiology.

[8]  E E Fetz,et al.  Relation between shapes of post‐synaptic potentials and changes in firing probability of cat motoneurones , 1983, The Journal of physiology.

[9]  P. Thompson,et al.  Motor cortex stimulation in intact man. 1. General characteristics of EMG responses in different muscles. , 1987, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[10]  P. Thompson,et al.  Motor cortex stimulation in intact man. 2. Multiple descending volleys. , 1987, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[11]  V. Amassian,et al.  Physiological basis of motor effects of a transient stimulus to cerebral cortex. , 1987, Neurosurgery.

[12]  M Nordin,et al.  Motor-unit responses in human wrist flexor and extensor muscles to transcranial cortical stimuli. , 1987, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  B. Day,et al.  Electric and magnetic stimulation of human motor cortex: surface EMG and single motor unit responses. , 1989, The Journal of physiology.

[14]  A. Berardelli,et al.  Corticospinal potentials after transcranial stimulation in humans. , 1989, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[15]  V. Amassian,et al.  Focal stimulation of human peripheral nerve with the magnetic coil: A comparison with electrical stimulation , 1989, Experimental Neurology.

[16]  P. Maccabee,et al.  Spatial distribution of the electric field induced in volume by round and figure '8' magnetic coils: relevance to activation of sensory nerve fibers. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  V E Amassian,et al.  A comparison of corticospinal activation by magnetic coil and electrical stimulation of monkey motor cortex. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[18]  J C Rothwell,et al.  Intra-operative recording of motor tract potentials at the cervico-medullary junction following scalp electrical and magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex. , 1991, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[19]  M. Hallett,et al.  Optimal Focal Transcranial Magnetic Activation of the Human Motor Cortex: Effects of Coil Orientation, Shape of the Induced Current Pulse, and Stimulus Intensity , 1992, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[20]  S. Boniface,et al.  Magnetic brain stimulation with a double coil: the importance of coil orientation. , 1992, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[21]  V. Amassian,et al.  Modelling magnetic coil excitation of human cerebral cortex with a peripheral nerve immersed in a brain-shaped volume conductor: the significance of fiber bending in excitation. , 1992, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[22]  A Keller,et al.  The patterns and synaptic properties of horizontal intracortical connections in the rat motor cortex. , 1993, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  M Crawford,et al.  Direct comparison of corticospinal volleys in human subjects to transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation. , 1993, The Journal of physiology.

[24]  B. Day,et al.  The effect of magnetic coil orientation on the latency of surface EMG and single motor unit responses in the first dorsal interosseous muscle. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[25]  A. Møller,et al.  Conduction pathways and generators of magnetic evoked spinal cord potentials: a study in monkeys. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[26]  E Marg,et al.  Finding the depth of magnetic brain stimulation: a re-evaluation. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[27]  P. Ashby,et al.  Relationship between EPSP shape and cross-correlation profile explored by computer simulation for studies on human motoneurons , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[28]  Hiroshi Asanuma,et al.  Spread of mono- and polysynaptic connections within cat's motor cortex , 1973, Experimental Brain Research.