Yoshikazu Ugawa

Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord, roots and peripheral nerves: Basic principles and procedures for routine clinical and research application. An updated report from an I.F.C.N. Committee

These guidelines provide an up-date of previous IFCN report on “Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application” (Rossini et al., 1994). A new Committee, composed of international experts, some of whom were in the panel of the 1994 “Report”, was selected to produce a current state-of-the-art review of non-invasive stimulation both for clinical application and research in neuroscience. Since 1994, the international scientific community has seen a rapid increase in non-invasive brain stimulation in studying cognition, brain–behavior relationship and pathophysiology of various neurologic and psychiatric disorders. New paradigms of stimulation and new techniques have been developed. Furthermore, a large number of studies and clinical trials have demonstrated potential therapeutic applications of non-invasive brain stimulation, especially for TMS. Recent guidelines can be found in the literature covering specific aspects of non-invasive brain stimulation, such as safety (Rossi et al., 2009), methodology (Groppa et al., 2012) and therapeutic applications (Lefaucheur et al., 2014). This up-dated review covers theoretical, physiological and practical aspects of non-invasive stimulation of brain, spinal cord, nerve roots and peripheral nerves in the light of more updated knowledge, and include some recent extensions and developments.

The clinical diagnostic utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation: Report of an IFCN committee

The review focuses on the clinical diagnostic utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). The central motor conduction time (CMCT) is a sensitive method to detect myelopathy and abnormalities may be detected in the absence of radiological changes. CMCT may also detect upper motor neuron involvement in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The diagnostic sensitivity may be increased by using the triple stimulation technique (TST), by combining several parameters such as CMCT, motor threshold and silent period, or by studying multiple muscles. In peripheral facial nerve palsies, TMS may be used to localize the site of nerve dysfunction and clarify the etiology. TMS measures also have high sensitivity in detecting lesions in multiple sclerosis and abnormalities in CMCT or TST may correlate with motor impairment and disability. Cerebellar stimulation may detect lesions in the cerebellum or the cerebellar output pathway. TMS may detect upper motor neuron involvement in patients with atypical parkinsonism and equivocal signs. The ipsilateral silent period that measures transcallosal inhibition is a potential method to distinguish between different parkinsonian syndromes. Short latency afferent inhibition (SAI), which is related to central cholinergic transmission, is reduced in Alzheimers disease. Changes in SAI following administration of cholinesterase inhibitor may be related to the long-term efficacy of this treatment. The results of MEP measurement in the first week after stroke correlate with functional outcome. We conclude that TMS measures have demonstrated diagnostic utility in myelopathy, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and multiple sclerosis. TMS measures have potential clinical utility in cerebellar disease, dementia, facial nerve disorders, movement disorders, stroke, epilepsy, migraine and chronic pain.

Paired-pulse magnetic stimulation of the human motor cortex: differences among I waves.

1 In paired‐pulse cortical stimulation experiments, conditioning subthreshold stimuli suppress the electromyographic (EMG) responses of relaxed muscles to suprathreshold magnetic test stimuli at short interstimulus intervals (ISIs) (1‐5 ms) and facilitate them at long ISIs (8‐15 ms). 2 We made paired‐pulse magnetic stimulation studies on the response of the first dorsal interosseous muscle (FDI) produced by I1 or I3 waves using our previously reported method which preferentially elicits one group of I waves when subjects make a slight voluntary contraction. In some experiments the conditioning and test stimuli were oppositely directed, in the others they were oriented in the same direction. Single motor unit responses were recorded with a concentric needle electrode, and surface EMG responses with cup electrodes. 3 In post‐stimulus time histograms (PSTHs) of the firing probability of motor units, the peaks produced by I3 waves were decreased by a subthreshold conditioning stimulus that preferentially elicited I1 or I3 waves at an ISI of 4 ms. The amount of decrement depended on the intensity of the conditioning stimulus. The stronger the conditioning stimulus, the greater the suppression. In contrast, the peaks produced by I1 waves were little affected by any type of subthreshold conditioning stimulus, given 4 ms prior to the test stimulus. At an ISI of 10 ms, a subthreshold conditioning stimulus slightly decreased the size of the peak produced by the I3 waves, but did not affect the peaks evoked by I1 waves. 4 Surface EMGs showed that a subthreshold conditioning stimulus suppressed the responses produced by I3 waves irrespective of its current direction (anterior or posterior). Both the amount and duration of suppression depended on the intensity of the conditioning stimulus, but not on its current direction. Both parameters increased when the intensity increased. At a high intensity conditioning stimulus, suppression was evoked at ISIs of 1‐20 ms, compatible with the duration of GABA‐mediated inhibition found in animal experiments. Responses produced by I1 waves were little affected by any type of subthreshold conditioning stimulus. 5 We conclude that a subthreshold conditioning stimulus given over the motor cortex moderately suppresses I3 waves but does not affect I1 waves. The duration of suppression of the I3 waves supports the idea that this is an effect of GABAergic inhibition within the motor cortex.

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.

Endoscopic management of carpal tunnel syndrome.

This article describes a subcutaneous endoscopic operative procedure for carpal tunnel syndrome and analyzes its effectiveness using electrophysiological data. Subcutaneous transverse carpal ligament release under universal subcutaneous endoscope (USE) was performed using local anesthesia without pneumotourniquet in 54 hands of 45 patients since June 1986. The mean follow-up period was 13.8 months. Sensory disturbances began to subside immediately after the operation and disappeared within 2 months in all cases. After the disappearance of sensory disturbances, we performed postoperative electrophysiological studies in 27 patients (33 hands). Postoperative electrophysiological data were significantly improved in all cases. Patients did not suffer from any serious complications such as motor branch injuries of the median nerve, hypesthesia of the palm, or injuries of the superficial palmar arch. From these results, we conclude that the transverse carpal ligament can be safely incised by this procedure.

Interhemispheric facilitation of the hand motor area in humans

1 We investigated interhemispheric interactions between the human hand motor areas using transcranial cortical magnetic and electrical stimulation. 2 A magnetic test stimulus was applied over the motor cortex contralateral to the recorded muscle (test motor cortex), and an electrical or magnetic conditioning stimulus was applied over the ipsilateral hemisphere (conditioning motor cortex). We investigated the effects of the conditioning stimulus on responses to the test stimulus. 3 Two effects were elicited at different interstimulus intervals (ISIs): early facilitation (ISI = 4–5 ms) and late inhibition (ISI ≥ 11 ms). 4 The early facilitation was evoked by a magnetic or anodal electrical conditioning stimulus over the motor point in the conditioning hemisphere, which suggests that the conditioning stimulus for early facilitation directly activates corticospinal neurones. 5 The ISIs for early facilitation taken together with the time required for activation of corticospinal neurones by I3‐waves in the test hemisphere are compatible with the interhemispheric conduction time through the corpus callosum. Early facilitation was observed in responses to I3‐waves, but not in responses to D‐waves nor to I1‐waves. Based on these results, we conclude that early facilitation is mediated through the corpus callosum. 6 If the magnetic conditioning stimulus induced posteriorly directed currents, or if an anodal electrical conditioning stimulus was applied over a point 2 cm anterior to the motor point, then we observed late inhibition with no early facilitation. 7 Late inhibition was evoked in responses to both I1‐ and I3‐waves, but was not evoked in responses to D‐waves. The stronger the conditioning stimulus was, the greater was the amount of inhibition. These results are compatible with surround inhibition at the motor cortex.

Basic mechanisms of TMS.

Summary Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is now established as an important noninvasive measure for neurophysiologic investigation of the central and peripheral nervous systems in humans. Magnetic stimulation can be used for stimulating peripheral nerves with a similar mechanism of activation as for electrical stimulation. When TMS is applied to the cerebral cortex, however, some features emerge that distinguish it from transcranial electrical stimulation. One of the most important features is designated the D and I wave hypothesis, which is now widely accepted as a mechanism of TMS of the motor cortex. Transcranial electrical stimulation excites the pyramidal tract axons directly, either at the initial segment of the neuron or at proximal internodes in the subcortical white matter, giving rise to D (direct) waves, whereas TMS excites the pyramidal neurons transsynaptically, giving rise to I (indirect) waves. There are still other phenomena with mechanisms that remain to be elucidated. First, not only excitatory effects but also inhibitory effects can be elicited by TMS of the cerebral cortex (e.g., the silent period and intracortical inhibition). The inhibitory effect may also be used to investigate cerebral functions other than the motor cortex, such as the visual, sensory cortices, and the frontal eye field, from which no overt response like the motor evoked potential can be elicited. Second, there is an abundance of intraregional functional connectivities among different cortical areas that can also be revealed by TMS, or TMS in combination with neuroimaging techniques. Last, repetitive transcranial stimulation exerts a lasting effect on brain function even after the stimulation has ceased. With further investigation of the neural mechanisms of TMS, these techniques will open up new possibilities for investigating the physiologic function of the brain as well as opportunities for clinical application.

Consensus paper: Combining transcranial stimulation with neuroimaging

In the last decade, combined transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-neuroimaging studies have greatly stimulated research in the field of TMS and neuroimaging. Here, we review how TMS can be combined with various neuroimaging techniques to investigate human brain function. When applied during neuroimaging (online approach), TMS can be used to test how focal cortex stimulation acutely modifies the activity and connectivity in the stimulated neuronal circuits. TMS and neuroimaging can also be separated in time (offline approach). A conditioning session of repetitive TMS (rTMS) may be used to induce rapid reorganization in functional brain networks. The temporospatial patterns of TMS-induced reorganization can be subsequently mapped by using neuroimaging methods. Alternatively, neuroimaging may be performed first to localize brain areas that are involved in a given task. The temporospatial information obtained by neuroimaging can be used to define the optimal site and time point of stimulation in a subsequent experiment in which TMS is used to probe the functional contribution of the stimulated area to a specific task. In this review, we first address some general methodologic issues that need to be taken into account when using TMS in the context of neuroimaging. We then discuss the use of specific brain mapping techniques in conjunction with TMS. We emphasize that the various neuroimaging techniques offer complementary information and have different methodologic strengths and weaknesses.

Bidirectional long‐term motor cortical plasticity and metaplasticity induced by quadripulse transcranial magnetic stimulation

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has emerged as a promising tool to induce plastic changes that are thought in some cases to reflect N‐methyl‐d‐aspartate‐sensitive changes in synaptic efficacy. As in animal experiments, there is some evidence that the sign of rTMS‐induced plasticity depends on the prior history of cortical activity, conforming to the Bienenstock–Cooper–Munro (BCM) theory. However, experiments exploring these plastic changes have only examined priming‐induced effects on a limited number of rTMS protocols, often using designs in which the priming alone had a larger effect than the principle conditioning protocol. The aim of this study was to introduce a new rTMS protocol that gives a broad range of after‐effects from suppression to facilitation and then test how each of these is affected by a priming protocol that on its own has no effect on motor cortical excitability, as indexed by motor‐evoked potential (MEP). Repeated trains of four monophasic TMS pulses (quadripulse stimulation: QPS) separated by interstimulus intervals of 1.5–1250 ms produced a range of after‐effects that were compatible with changes in synaptic plasticity. Thus, QPS at short intervals facilitated MEPs for more than 75 min, whereas QPS at long intervals suppressed MEPs for more than 75 min. Paired‐pulse TMS experiments exploring intracortical inhibition and facilitation after QPS revealed effects on excitatory but not inhibitory circuits of the primary motor cortex. Finally, the effect of priming protocols on QPS‐induced plasticity was consistent with a BCM‐like model of priming that shifts the crossover point at which synaptic plasticity reverses from depression to potentiation. The broad range of after‐effects produced by the new rTMS protocol opens up new possibilities for detailed examination of theories of metaplasticity in humans.

Ipsilateral cortico-cortical inhibition of the motor cortex in various neurological disorders

We used a paired-pulse magnetic stimulation technique to study ipsilateral cortico-cortical inhibition of the motor cortex in 48 patients with various neurological disorders and in 20 normal volunteers. In the normal subjects, the first subthreshold conditioning stimulus suppressed responses to the second suprathreshold test stimulus at interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of 1-5 ms (inhibition at short intervals), and facilitated them at ISIs of 8-15 ms (facilitation at long intervals). Patients with motor neuron disease, except those in whom brain stimulation produced control responses that were generated by direct activation of corticospinal neurons (D-waves), had normal inhibition at short intervals. Facilitation at long intervals was not elicited in some patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Less inhibition at short intervals and normal facilitation at long intervals was found for all the patients with progressive myoclonic epilepsy, a condition in which the excitability of cortical inhibitory interneurons is thought to be affected. Inhibition at short intervals was disturbed, but facilitation at long intervals was intact in the patients with movement disorders (Parkinsons disease, corticobasal degeneration, and Wilsons disease). In these patients, positron emission tomography (PET) studies showed decreased regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) in the basal ganglia in the relaxed state. However, normal suppression was elicited in the patients with Parkinsons disease with normal rCBF. In four patients with chorea, the time-course of inhibition and facilitation was normal, even though PET studies showed decreased rCBF in the basal ganglia in two of them. Normal inhibition could not be elicited in patients who had a small lesion in the basal ganglia or in the pathway from basal ganglia to the primary motor cortex; the putamen, globus pallidus, and supplementary motor cortex. In contrast, patients who had a lesion in a sensory system (sensory cortex or sensory thalamus) or in the pontine nucleus had normal suppression. We conclude that the results of ipsilateral cortico-cortical inhibition with paired magnetic stimulation reflect the excitability of inhibitory interneurons in the motor cortex and that outputs from the basal ganglia markedly affect this inhibition, but outputs from somato-sensory systems or cerebellum do not. Moreover, dysfunction of the corticospinal tract or spinal motoneurons does not affect results obtained by the paired magnetic stimulation technique when the control responses are generated by I-waves (i.e. descending volleys are produced by transsynaptic activation of the corticospinal tract neurons.