Priming theta burst stimulation enhances motor cortex plasticity in young but not old adults
Introduction
It is now well recognised that the neural architecture of the human brain is not static, but instead demonstrates extensive and remarkable flexibility. This flexibility, referred to as neuroplasticity, has been shown to represent a fundamental component of learning and memory [1], [2], in addition to being important for recovery from brain injury or damage [3]. While the mechanisms contributing to neuroplasticity are not fully understood, an extensive body of literature has identified several contributing factors, including alterations to inhibitory neurotransmission [4] and unmasking of latent neuronal pathways [5]. However, animal research has shown that long-term potentiation (LTP) or depression (LTD) of synaptic strength is particularly important (see [6]). These findings have been supported in humans by studies using non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), a technique able to induce and measure LTP- and LTD-like changes within the human brain [7].
Some of the best evidence for the functional importance of neuroplasticity is seen in situations where plasticity is altered. While such changes are often associated with central nervous system damage or pathology [8], [9], [10], they may also be observed in otherwise healthy individuals. For example, several lines of evidence suggest that neuroplastic capacity is reduced by healthy ageing. This includes reports that older adults demonstrate a reduced potentiation of corticospinal excitability following the application of plasticity-inducing NIBS paradigms [11], [12], [13], [14], as well as following a period of motor training [15], [16]. The functional importance of neuroplasticity suggests that this reduced response in older adults may contribute to the motor deficits commonly associated with the ageing process. An improved understanding of age-related reductions in plasticity, as well as the development of interventions able to ameliorate this deficiency, therefore represents an important area of neuroscience research.
The response to a plasticity-inducing paradigm is known to be affected by a number of factors, including time of day, attentional focus and genetics (see [17]). However, one major influence on plasticity induction is the level of previous activity within the area targeted by the intervention [18]. A history of increased synaptic activity within the target area can reduce or even reverse the expected response to a plasticity inducing NIBS paradigm. This type of interaction is referred to as metaplasticity and has been suggested to represent a means of homeostatically moderating changes in synaptic excitability in order to avoid the potentially destabilising influence of run-away potentiation/depression that LTP and LTD are inherently capable of producing (see [19]). However, this mechanism has also formed the basis for interventions aiming to manipulate the plasticity response by first ‘priming’ synapses of the target area. This approach has been studied in young subjects using a number of different NIBS techniques, with the findings suggesting that the resulting neuroplastic modifications are stronger, longer lasting and more stable [20]. However, it is currently unknown if priming stimulation can be used to compensate for age-related reductions in the plasticity response to NIBS interventions.
Therefore, the aim of the current study was to investigate the efficacy of priming stimulation in healthy elderly adults. This was accomplished by comparing the response to paired blocks of a NIBS protocol (theta burst stimulation, TBS [21]), separated by a 10 min rest period, between young and old adults. In keeping with homeostatic metaplasticity mechanisms, we hypothesised an increase in LTP-like plasticity when the induction protocol was primed by a prior LTD-like plasticity protocol. However, based on previous observations of age-related declines in the response to TBS [13], we also expected that this effect would be reduced in elderly adults.
Section snippets
Methods
16 young (mean ± SD, 22.3 ± 1.0 years; 11 females) and 16 old (mean ± SD, 70.2 ± 1.7 years; 9 females) subjects were recruited from the university and wider community to participate in the current study. Exclusion criteria included a history of neurological or psychiatric disease, or current use of psychoactive medication (sedatives, antipsychotics, antidepressants etc.). Hand preference and laterality were assessed using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory [22], while cognitive impairment was
Results
All subjects completed the experiment in full and without adverse reaction. With the exception of age, no differences in subject characteristics, RMT or Mmax amplitude were found between groups or sessions (Table 1). Furthermore, the amplitude of the baseline MEP was not different between groups (F1, 30 = 1.1, P = 0.3) or sessions (F2, 1334 = 1.4, P = 0.3), and there was no interaction between factors (F2, 1334 = 1.7, P = 0.2; Table 2).
Discussion
The current study investigated the ability of priming stimulation to modify the induction of motor cortical neuroplasticity in young and old adults. Our main finding was that priming stimulation was ineffective in old adults, whereas an increased plasticity response was observed following priming in young adults. Furthermore, in both groups, these effects were not dependent on the type of priming protocol.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Projects Grant (grant number DP150100930).
References (49)
- et al.
Neuroplasticity subserving motor skill learning
Neuron
(2011) - et al.
Non-invasive brain stimulation: a new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke?
Lancet Neurol
(2006) - et al.
Therapeutic effects of non-invasive brain stimulation with direct currents (tDCS) in neuropsychiatric diseases
Neuroimage
(2014) - et al.
Reduced motor cortex plasticity following inhibitory rTMS in older adults
Clin Neurophysiol
(2010) - et al.
Effects of aging on the human motor cortical plasticity studied by paired associative stimulation
Clin Neurophysiol
(2010) - et al.
Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex
Neuron
(2005) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory
Neuropsychologia
(1971)- et al.
“Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician
J Psychiatr Res
(1975) - et al.
Probing changes in corticospinal excitability following theta burst stimulation of the human primary motor cortex
Clin Neurophysiol
(2016) - et al.
Ovarian hormones and cortical excitability. An rTMS study in humans
Clin Neurophysiol
(2004)
Use of theta-burst stimulation in changing excitability of motor cortex: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Neurosci Biobehav Rev
Inter-individual variability in response to non-invasive brain stimulation paradigms
Brain Stimul
A comparison of neuroplastic responses to non-invasive brain stimulation protocols and motor learning in healthy adults
Neurosci Lett
Paired associative stimulation increases motor cortex excitability more effectively than theta-burst stimulation
Clin Neurophysiol
Efficacy and time course of theta burst stimulation in healthy humans
Brain Stimul
Ten years of theta burst stimulation in humans: established knowledge, unknowns and prospects
Brain Stimul
The effects of individualized theta burst stimulation on the excitability of the human motor system
Brain Stimul
Metaplasticity: the plasticity of synaptic plasticity
Trends Neurosci
Impact of repetitive theta burst stimulation on motor cortex excitability
Brain Stimul
The after-effect of human theta burst stimulation is NMDA receptor dependent
Clin Neurophysiol
Aging and surface expression of hippocampal NMDA receptors
J Biol Chem
Induction of late LTP-like plasticity in the human motor cortex by repeated non-invasive brain stimulation
Brain Stimul
Plasticity in the human central nervous system
Brain
Role of adaptive plasticity in recovery of function after damage to motor cortex
Muscle Nerve
Cited by (64)
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Across the Lifespan: Impact of Developmental and Degenerative Processes
2024, Biological PsychiatryPlasticity of visual evoked potentials in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1
2022, Clinical Neurophysiology