Cargando…

Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old

Interhemispheric interactions are important for arm coordination and hemispheric specialization. Unilateral voluntary static contraction is known to increase bilateral corticospinal motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude. It is unknown how increasing and decreasing contraction affect the opposite li...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ermer, Elsa, Harcum, Stacey, Lush, Jaime, Magder, Laurence S., Whitall, Jill, Wittenberg, George F., Dimyan, Michael A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7573560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33132888
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.581008
_version_ 1783597467288207360
author Ermer, Elsa
Harcum, Stacey
Lush, Jaime
Magder, Laurence S.
Whitall, Jill
Wittenberg, George F.
Dimyan, Michael A.
author_facet Ermer, Elsa
Harcum, Stacey
Lush, Jaime
Magder, Laurence S.
Whitall, Jill
Wittenberg, George F.
Dimyan, Michael A.
author_sort Ermer, Elsa
collection PubMed
description Interhemispheric interactions are important for arm coordination and hemispheric specialization. Unilateral voluntary static contraction is known to increase bilateral corticospinal motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude. It is unknown how increasing and decreasing contraction affect the opposite limb. Since dynamic muscle contraction is more ecologically relevant to daily activities, we studied MEP recruitment using a novel method and short interval interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) from active to resting hemisphere at 4 phases of contralateral ECR contraction: Rest, Ramp Up [increasing at 25% of maximum voluntary contraction (MVC)], Execution (tonic at 50% MVC), and Ramp Down (relaxation at 25% MVC) in 42 healthy adults. We analyzed the linear portion of resting extensor carpi radialis (ECR) MEP recruitment by stimulating at multiple intensities and comparing slopes, expressed as mV per TMS stimulation level, via linear mixed modeling. In younger participants (age ≤ 30), resting ECR MEP recruitment slopes were significantly and equally larger both at Ramp Up (slope increase = 0.047, p < 0.001) and Ramp Down (slope increase = 0.031, p < 0.001) compared to rest, despite opposite directions of force change. In contrast, Active ECR MEP recruitment slopes were larger in Ramp Down than all other phases (Rest:0.184, p < 0.001; Ramp Up:0.128, p = 0.001; Execution: p = 0.003). Older (age ≥ 60) participants’ resting MEP recruitment slope was higher than younger participants across all phases. IHI did not reduce MEP recruitment slope equally in old compared to young. In conclusion, our data indicate that MEP recruitment slope in the resting limb is affected by the homologous active limb contraction force, irrespective of the direction of force change. The active arm MEP recruitment slope, in contrast, remains relatively unaffected. Older participants had steeper MEP recruitment slopes and less interhemispheric inhibition compared to younger participants.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7573560
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75735602020-10-30 Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old Ermer, Elsa Harcum, Stacey Lush, Jaime Magder, Laurence S. Whitall, Jill Wittenberg, George F. Dimyan, Michael A. Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Interhemispheric interactions are important for arm coordination and hemispheric specialization. Unilateral voluntary static contraction is known to increase bilateral corticospinal motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude. It is unknown how increasing and decreasing contraction affect the opposite limb. Since dynamic muscle contraction is more ecologically relevant to daily activities, we studied MEP recruitment using a novel method and short interval interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) from active to resting hemisphere at 4 phases of contralateral ECR contraction: Rest, Ramp Up [increasing at 25% of maximum voluntary contraction (MVC)], Execution (tonic at 50% MVC), and Ramp Down (relaxation at 25% MVC) in 42 healthy adults. We analyzed the linear portion of resting extensor carpi radialis (ECR) MEP recruitment by stimulating at multiple intensities and comparing slopes, expressed as mV per TMS stimulation level, via linear mixed modeling. In younger participants (age ≤ 30), resting ECR MEP recruitment slopes were significantly and equally larger both at Ramp Up (slope increase = 0.047, p < 0.001) and Ramp Down (slope increase = 0.031, p < 0.001) compared to rest, despite opposite directions of force change. In contrast, Active ECR MEP recruitment slopes were larger in Ramp Down than all other phases (Rest:0.184, p < 0.001; Ramp Up:0.128, p = 0.001; Execution: p = 0.003). Older (age ≥ 60) participants’ resting MEP recruitment slope was higher than younger participants across all phases. IHI did not reduce MEP recruitment slope equally in old compared to young. In conclusion, our data indicate that MEP recruitment slope in the resting limb is affected by the homologous active limb contraction force, irrespective of the direction of force change. The active arm MEP recruitment slope, in contrast, remains relatively unaffected. Older participants had steeper MEP recruitment slopes and less interhemispheric inhibition compared to younger participants. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7573560/ /pubmed/33132888 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.581008 Text en Copyright © 2020 Ermer, Harcum, Lush, Magder, Whitall, Wittenberg and Dimyan. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Ermer, Elsa
Harcum, Stacey
Lush, Jaime
Magder, Laurence S.
Whitall, Jill
Wittenberg, George F.
Dimyan, Michael A.
Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old
title Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old
title_full Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old
title_fullStr Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old
title_full_unstemmed Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old
title_short Contraction Phase and Force Differentially Change Motor Evoked Potential Recruitment Slope and Interhemispheric Inhibition in Young Versus Old
title_sort contraction phase and force differentially change motor evoked potential recruitment slope and interhemispheric inhibition in young versus old
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7573560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33132888
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.581008
work_keys_str_mv AT ermerelsa contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold
AT harcumstacey contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold
AT lushjaime contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold
AT magderlaurences contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold
AT whitalljill contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold
AT wittenberggeorgef contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold
AT dimyanmichaela contractionphaseandforcedifferentiallychangemotorevokedpotentialrecruitmentslopeandinterhemisphericinhibitioninyoungversusold