No Evidence of Hysteresis in Quadriceps or Hamstring Active Motor Evoked Potentials

BackgroundThe excitability of the corticospinal tract (<i>i.e.,</i> corticospinal excitability) is a valuable tool for assessing neurophysiology and the effectiveness of interventions in individuals with and without neurological and/or orthopaedic injuries. Corticospinal excitability is often measured with an input-output recruitment curve, which is produced by stimulating the motor cortex via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at several intensities and measuring the changes in the evoked responses. However, it is currently unclear if hysteresis in motor evoked potentials (MEPs) (<i>i.e.,</i> changes in MEP amplitude due to the order of stimulus intensities) affects the resulting measure of excitability, particularly in lower extremity muscles.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether the order of stimulus intensity (ascending, descending, randomized) affects input-output recruitment curves measured in the lower extremity muscles.MethodsRecruitment curves were produced in neurologically intact individuals by stimulating the primary motor cortex at 70% to 140% of active motor threshold in 10% increments. We examined three stimulus intensity ordering paradigms: ascending (70<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:math>140), descending (140<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:math>70), and randomized. We measured MEPs of the quadriceps and the antagonistic hamstring muscles using surface electromyography in addition to quadriceps motor evoked torque. We computed the area under the recruitment curve (AUC) of the raw and normalized motor evoked responses and used classical and Bayesian inference methods to comprehensively evaluate hysteresis in MEPs.ResultsClassical hypothesis testing revealed no significant main effects of stimulus order. Bayesian analyses also confirmed that the null model was more favored than the main effects model.ConclusionsCorticospinal excitability of the quadriceps and antagonistic hamstring muscles were not influenced by stimulus intensity order. Any of the three approaches (ascending, descending, randomized) may be used when measuring recruitment curves for the quadriceps and hamstring muscles.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09226028251330850
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.25

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

No Evidence of Hysteresis in Quadriceps or Hamstring Active Motor Evoked Potentials

Thomas E. Augenstein, Chandramouli Krishnan, Kazandra M. Rodriguez, Riann M. Palmieri‐Smith et al.
1 citations
Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
0.25
article

No Evidence of Hysteresis in Quadriceps or Hamstring Active Motor Evoked Potentials

Thomas E. Augenstein, Chandramouli Krishnan, Kazandra M. Rodriguez, Riann M. Palmieri‐Smith, Adam Gardi
article en
1 citations

Abstract

BackgroundThe excitability of the corticospinal tract (<i>i.e.,</i> corticospinal excitability) is a valuable tool for assessing neurophysiology and the effectiveness of interventions in individuals with and without neurological and/or orthopaedic injuries. Corticospinal excitability is often measured with an input-output recruitment curve, which is produced by stimulating the motor cortex via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at several intensities and measuring the changes in the evoked responses. However, it is currently unclear if hysteresis in motor evoked potentials (MEPs) (<i>i.e.,</i> changes in MEP amplitude due to the order of stimulus intensities) affects the resulting measure of excitability, particularly in lower extremity muscles.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether the order of stimulus intensity (ascending, descending, randomized) affects input-output recruitment curves measured in the lower extremity muscles.MethodsRecruitment curves were produced in neurologically intact individuals by stimulating the primary motor cortex at 70% to 140% of active motor threshold in 10% increments. We examined three stimulus intensity ordering paradigms: ascending (70<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:math>140), descending (140<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:math>70), and randomized. We measured MEPs of the quadriceps and the antagonistic hamstring muscles using surface electromyography in addition to quadriceps motor evoked torque. We computed the area under the recruitment curve (AUC) of the raw and normalized motor evoked responses and used classical and Bayesian inference methods to comprehensively evaluate hysteresis in MEPs.ResultsClassical hypothesis testing revealed no significant main effects of stimulus order. Bayesian analyses also confirmed that the null model was more favored than the main effects model.ConclusionsCorticospinal excitability of the quadriceps and antagonistic hamstring muscles were not influenced by stimulus intensity order. Any of the three approaches (ascending, descending, randomized) may be used when measuring recruitment curves for the quadriceps and hamstring muscles.

Restorative Neurology and NeuroscienceVol. 42(3-4)
University of Michigan (US), Michigan Medicine (US), Drexel University (US)
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
0.25
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.