Differential effects of conventional and high-definition transcranial direct-current stimulation of the motor cortex on implicit motor sequence learning.
implicit motor sequence learning
motor association cortex
premotor cortex
primary motor cortex
supplementary motor area
tDCS
Journal
The European journal of neuroscience
ISSN: 1460-9568
Titre abrégé: Eur J Neurosci
Pays: France
ID NLM: 8918110
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Nov 2023
Historique:
revised:
29
09
2023
received:
06
04
2023
accepted:
04
10
2023
medline:
22
11
2023
pubmed:
21
10
2023
entrez:
21
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Conventional transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) delivered to the primary motor cortex (M1) has been shown to enhance implicit motor sequence learning (IMSL). Conventional tDCS targets M1 but also the motor association cortices (MAC), making the precise contribution of these areas to IMSL presently unclear. We aimed to address this issue by comparing conventional tDCS of M1 and MAC to 4 * 1 high-definition (HD) tDCS, which more focally targets M1. In this mixed-factorial, sham-controlled, crossover study in 89 healthy young adults, we used mixed-effects models to analyse sequence-specific and general learning effects in the acquisition and short- and long-term consolidation phases of IMSL, as measured by the serial reaction time task. Conventional tDCS did not influence general learning, improved sequence-specific learning during acquisition (anodal: M = 42.64 ms, sham: M = 32.87 ms, p = .041), and seemingly deteriorated it at long-term consolidation (anodal: M = 75.37 ms, sham: M = 86.63 ms, p = .019). HD tDCS did not influence general learning, slowed performance specifically in sequential blocks across all learning phases (all p's < .050), and consequently deteriorated sequence-specific learning during acquisition (anodal: M = 24.13 ms, sham: M = 35.67 ms, p = .014) and long-term consolidation (anodal: M = 60.03 ms, sham: M = 75.01 ms, p = .002). Our findings indicate that the observed superior conventional tDCS effects on IMSL are possibly attributable to a generalized stimulation of M1 and/or adjacent MAC, rather than M1 alone. Alternatively, the differential effects can be attributed to cathodal inhibition of other cortical areas involved in IMSL by the 4 * 1 HD tDCS return electrodes, and/or more variable electric field strengths induced by HD tDCS, compared with conventional tDCS.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4181-4194Subventions
Organisme : Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Organisme : Research Foundation Flanders (Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, FWO)
ID : 11G9622N
Informations de copyright
© 2023 Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Aizenstein, H. J., Stenger, V. A., Cochran, J., Clark, K., Johnson, M., Nebes, R. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Regional brain activation during concurrent implicit and explicit sequence learning. Cerebral Cortex, 14(2), 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhg119
Antonenko, D., Thielscher, A., Saturnino, G. B., Aydin, S., Ittermann, B., Grittner, U., & Flöel, A. (2019). Towards precise brain stimulation: Is electric field simulation related to neuromodulation? Brain Stimulation, 12(5), 1159-1168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2019.03.072
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
Bates, D., Machler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Benninger, D. H., Lomarev, M., Lopez, G., Wassermann, E. M., Li, X., Considine, E., & Hallett, M. (2010). Transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 81(10), 1105-1111. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20870863/, https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2009.202556
Berlot, E., Popp, N. J., & Diedrichsen, J. (2020). A critical re-evaluation of fMRI signatures of motor sequence learning. eLife, 9, e55241. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55241
Boggio, P. S., Castro, L. O., Savagim, E. A., Braite, R., Cruz, V. C., Rocha, R. R., Rigonatti, S. P., Silva, M. T. A., & Fregni, F. (2006). Enhancement of non-dominant hand motor function by anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroscience Letters, 404(1-2), 232-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2006.05.051
Bostan, A. C., & Strick, P. L. (2018). The basal ganglia and the cerebellum: Nodes in an integrated network. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 19(6), 338-350. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-018-0002-7
Cole, L., Giuffre, A., Ciechanski, P., Carlson, H. L., Zewdie, E., Kuo, H.-C., & Kirton, A. (2018). Effects of high-definition and conventional transcranial direct-current stimulation on motor learning in children. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 12, 787. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00787
Cuypers, K., Leenus, D. J. F., van den Berg, F. E., Nitsche, M. A., Thijs, H., Wenderoth, N., & Meesen, R. L. J. (2013). Is motor learning mediated by tDCS intensity? PLoS ONE, 8(6), e67344. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067344
Dahms, C., Brodoehl, S., Witte, O. W., & Klingner, C. M. (2020). The importance of different learning stages for motor sequence learning after stroke. Human Brain Mapping, 41(1), 270-286. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24793
de Rosario-Martinez, H. (2015). phia: Post-hoc interaction analysis. R Package Version 0.2-1, 442.
Deroost, N., Baetens, K., Jochen, V., Kerckhofs, E., Vandenbossche, J., & Kerckhofs, E. (2018). Anodal tDCS of the primary motor cortex and motor sequence learning in a large sample of patients with Parkinsons disease. Neuropsychiatry, 8(1), 35-46. https://doi.org/10.4172/neuropsychiatry.1000323
Doyon, J., Bellec, P., Amsel, R., Penhune, V., Monchi, O., Carrier, J., Lehericy, S., & Benali, H. (2009). Contributions of the basal ganglia and functionally related brain structures to motor learning. Behavioural Brain Research, 199(1), 61-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2008.11.012
Doyon, J., Penhune, V., & Ungerleider, L. G. (2003). Distinct contribution of the cortico-striatal and cortico-cerebellar systems to motor skill learning. Neuropsychologia, 41(3), 252-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00158-6
Dumel, G., Bourassa, M.-E., Charlebois-Plante, C., Desjardins, M., Doyon, J., Saint-Amour, D., & de Beaumont, L. (2018a). Motor learning improvement remains 3 months after a multisession anodal tDCS intervention in an aging population. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 10, 335. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2018.00335
Dumel, G., Bourassa, M.-È., Charlebois-Plante, C., Desjardins, M., Doyon, J., Saint-Amour, D., & de Beaumont, L. (2018b). Multisession anodal transcranial direct current stimulation induces motor cortex plasticity enhancement and motor learning generalization in an aging population. Clinical Neurophysiology, 129(2), 494-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2017.10.041
Edwards, D., Cortes, M., Datta, A., Minhas, P., Wassermann, E. M., & Bikson, M. (2013). Physiological and modeling evidence for focal transcranial electrical brain stimulation in humans: A basis for high-definition tDCS. NeuroImage, 74, 266-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.01.042
Evans, C., Zich, C., Lee, J. S. A., Ward, N., & Bestmann, S. (2022). Inter-individual variability in current direction for common tDCS montages. NeuroImage, 260, 119501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119501
Firouzi, M., Baetens, K., Swinnen, E., Baeken, C., Van Overwalle, F., & Deroost, N. (2021). Registered report: Does transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex improve implicit motor sequence learning in Parkinson's disease? Journal of Neuroscience Research, 99(10), 2406-2415. https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.24908
Firouzi, M., Van Herk, K., Kerckhofs, E., Swinnen, E., Baeken, C., Van Overwalle, F., & Deroost, N. (2021). Transcranial direct-current stimulation enhances implicit motor sequence learning in persons with Parkinson's disease with mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Neuropsychology, 15(3), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnp.12231
Foerster, Á., Yavari, F., Farnad, L., Jamil, A., Paulus, W., Nitsche, M. A., & Kuo, M.-F. (2019). Effects of electrode angle-orientation on the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability. Brain Stimulation, 12(2), 263-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2018.10.014
Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2011). Multivariate linear models in R. An R companion to applied regression. Los Angeles: Thousand Oaks.
Glasser, M. F., Coalson, T. S., Robinson, E. C., Hacker, C. D., Harwell, J., Yacoub, E., Ugurbil, K., Andersson, J., Beckmann, C. F., & Jenkinson, M. (2016). A multi-modal parcellation of human cerebral cortex. Nature, 536(7615), 171-178. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18933
Gomez Beldarrain, M., Gafman, J., Ruiz de Velasco, I., Pascual-Leone, A., & Garcia-Monco, J. (2002). Prefrontal lesions impair the implicit and explicit learning of sequences on visuomotor tasks. Experimental Brain Research, 142, 529-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-001-0935-2
Gonzalez, C. C., Billington, J., & Burke, M. R. (2016). The involvement of the fronto-parietal brain network in oculomotor sequence learning using fMRI. Neuropsychologia, 87, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.04.021
Gonzalez, C. C., & Burke, M. R. (2018). Motor sequence learning in the brain: The long and short of it. Neuroscience, 389, 85-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2018.01.061
Hamano, Y. H., Sugawara, S. K., Fukunaga, M., & Sadato, N. (2021). The integrative role of the M1 in motor sequence learning. Neuroscience Letters, 760, 136081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2021.136081
Hashemirad, F., Zoghi, M., Fitzgerald, P. B., & Jaberzadeh, S. (2016). The effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on motor sequence learning in healthy individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain and Cognition, 102, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.11.005
Haslinger, B., Erhard, P., Weilke, F., Ceballos-Baumann, A. O., Bartenstein, P., von Einsiedel, H. G., Schwaiger, M., Conrad, B., & Boecker, H. (2002). The role of lateral premotor-cerebellar-parietal circuits in motor sequence control: A parametric fMRI study. Cognitive Brain Research, 13(2), 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(01)00104-5
Hikosaka, O., Nakamura, K., Sakai, K., & Nakahara, H. (2002). Central mechanisms of motor skill learning. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 12(2), 217-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(02)00307-0
Hirano, M., Kubota, S., Koizume, Y., Tanaka, S., & Funase, K. (2017). Different effects of implicit and explicit motor sequence learning on latency of motor evoked potential evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation on the primary motor cortex. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, 671. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00671
Iannone, A., Santiago, I., Ajao, S. T., Brasil-Neto, J., Rothwell, J. C., & Spampinato, D. A. (2022). Comparing the effects of focal and conventional tDCS on motor skill learning: A proof of principle study. Neuroscience Research, 178, 83-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2022.01.006
Jongkees, B. J., Immink, M. A., Boer, O. D., Yavari, F., Nitsche, M. A., & Colzato, L. S. (2019). The effect of cerebellar tDCS on sequential motor response selection. Cerebellum, 18(4), 738-749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12311-019-01029-1
Kang, E. K., & Paik, N.-J. (2011). Effect of a tDCS electrode montage on implicit motor sequence learning in healthy subjects. Experimental & Translational Stroke Medicine, 3(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/2040-7378-3-4
Kantak, S. S., Mummidisetty, C. K., & Stinear, J. W. (2012). Primary motor and premotor cortex in implicit sequence learning-Evidence for competition between implicit and explicit human motor memory systems. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 36(5), 2710-2715. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.08175.x
Keele, S. W., Ivry, R., Mayr, U., Hazeltine, E., & Heuer, H. (2003). The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 110(2), 316-339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.316
Kincses, Z. T., Johansen-Berg, H., Tomassini, V., Bosnell, R., Matthews, P. M., & Beckmann, C. F. (2008). Model-free characterization of brain functional networks for motor sequence learning using fMRI. NeuroImage, 39(4), 1950-1958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.09.070
Klem, G. H., Lüders, H. O., Jasper, H. H., & Elger, C. (1999). The ten-twenty electrode system of the international federation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 52(3), 3-6.
Kuo, H.-I., Bikson, M., Datta, A., Minhas, P., Paulus, W., Kuo, M.-F., & Nitsche, M. A. (2013). Comparing cortical plasticity induced by conventional and high-definition 4 × 1 ring tDCS: A neurophysiological study. Brain Stimulation, 6(4), 644-648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2012.09.010
Lefebvre, S., Jann, K., Schmiesing, A., Ito, K., Jog, M., Schweighofer, N., Wang, D. J. J., & Liew, S.-L. (2019). Differences in high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation over the motor hotspot versus the premotor cortex on motor network excitability. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 17605. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-53985-7
Lo, S., & Andrews, S. (2015). To transform or not to transform: Using generalized linear mixed models to analyse reaction time data. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1171. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01171
Lum, J. A. G., Lammertink, I., Clark, G. M., Fuelscher, I., Hyde, C., Enticott, P. G., & Ullman, M. T. (2019). Visuospatial sequence learning on the serial reaction time task modulates the P1 event-related potential. Psychophysiology, 56(2), e13292. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13292
Masina, F., Arcara, G., Galletti, E., Cinque, I., Gamberini, L., & Mapelli, D. (2021). Neurophysiological and behavioural effects of conventional and high definition tDCS. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 7659. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87371-z
Müller, R.-A., Kleinhans, N., Pierce, K., Kemmotsu, N., & Courchesne, E. (2002). Functional MRI of motor sequence acquisition: Effects of learning stage and performance. Cognitive Brain Research, 14(2), 277-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00131-3
Nakamura, K., Sakai, K., & Hikosaka, O. (1998). Neuronal activity in medial frontal cortex during learning of sequential procedures. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80(5), 2671-2687. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1998.80.5.2671
Nitsche, M. A., & Paulus, W. (2000). Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. The Journal of Physiology, 527(3), 633-639. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x
Nitsche, M. A., Schauenburg, A., Lang, N., Liebetanz, D., Exner, C., Paulus, W., & Tergau, F. (2003). Facilitation of implicit motor learning by weak transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex in the human. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(4), 619-626. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892903321662994
Ohbayashi, M. (2021). The roles of the cortical motor areas in sequential movements. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 15, 640659. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2021.640659
Pascual-Leone, A., Wassermann, E. M., Grafman, J., & Hallett, M. (1996). The role of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in implicit procedural learning. Experimental Brain Research, 107, 479-485. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00230427
Penhune, V. B., & Steele, C. J. (2012). Parallel contributions of cerebellar, striatal and M1 mechanisms to motor sequence learning. Behavioural Brain Research, 226(2), 579-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.09.044
Polanía, R., Paulus, W., & Nitsche, M. A. (2012). Modulating cortico-striatal and thalamo-cortical functional connectivity with transcranial direct current stimulation. Human Brain Mapping, 33(10), 2499-2508. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.21380
Rawji, V., Ciocca, M., Zacharia, A., Soares, D., Truong, D., Bikson, M., Rothwell, J., & Bestmann, S. (2018). tDCS changes in motor excitability are specific to orientation of current flow. Brain Stimulation, 11(2), 289-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2017.11.001
Romano Bergstrom, J. C., Howard, J. H. Jr., & Howard, D. V. (2012). Enhanced implicit sequence learning in college-age video game players and musicians. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1800
Sakai, K., Hikosaka, O., Miyauchi, S., Takino, R., Sasaki, Y., & Pütz, B. (1998). Transition of brain activation from frontal to parietal areas in visuomotor sequence learning. Journal of Neuroscience, 18(5), 1827-1840. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-05-01827.1998
Savic, B., & Meier, B. (2016). How transcranial direct current stimulation can modulate implicit motor sequence learning and consolidation: A brief review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, 26. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00026
Schieber, M. H. (2020). Modern coordinates for the motor homunculus. The Journal of Physiology, 598(23), 5305-5306. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP280712
Stefaniak, N., Willems, S., Adam, S., & Meulemans, T. (2008). What is the impact of the explicit knowledge of sequence regularities on both deterministic and probabilistic serial reaction time task performance? Memory & Cognition, 36(7), 1283-1298. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.7.1283
Tecchio, F., Zappasodi, F., Assenza, G., Tombini, M., Vollaro, S., Barbati, G., & Rossini, P. M. (2010). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhances procedural consolidation. Journal of Neurophysiology, 104(2), 1134-1140. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00661.2009
Thielscher, A., Antunes, A., & Saturnino, G. B. (2015). Field modeling for transcranial magnetic stimulation: A useful tool to understand the physiological effects of TMS? 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 222-225.
Toni, I., Krams, M., Turner, R., & Passingham, R. E. (1998). The time course of changes during motor sequence learning: A whole-brain fMRI study. NeuroImage, 8(1), 50-61. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.1998.0349
Urry, K., Burns, N. R., & Baetu, I. (2015). Accuracy-based measures provide a better measure of sequence learning than reaction time-based measures. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1158. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01158
Van Hoornweder, S., Caulfield, K. A., Nitsche, M., Thielscher, A., & Meesen, R. L. J. (2022). Addressing transcranial electrical stimulation variability through prospective individualized dosing of electric field strength in 300 participants across two samples: The 2-SPED approach. Journal of Neural Engineering, 19(5), 056045. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ac9a78
Verleger, R., & Śmigasiewicz, K. (2016). Do rare stimuli evoke large P3s by being unexpected? A comparison of oddball effects between standard-oddball and prediction-oddball tasks. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 12(2), 88-104. https://doi.org/10.5709/acp-0189-9
Villamar, M. F., Volz, M. S., Bikson, M., Datta, A., DaSilva, A. F., & Fregni, F. (2013). Technique and considerations in the use of 4 × 1 ring high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS). JoVE (Journal of Visualized Experiments), 77, e50309.
Vines, B. W., Cerruti, C., & Schlaug, G. (2008). Dual-hemisphere tDCS facilitates greater improvements for healthy subjects' non-dominant hand compared to uni-hemisphere stimulation. BMC Neuroscience, 9, 103. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-9-103
Wade, S., & Hammond, G. (2015). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over premotor cortex facilitates observational learning of a motor sequence. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 41(12), 1597-1602. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.12916
Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. springer.
Wilkinson, L., Khan, Z., & Jahanshahi, M. (2009). The role of the basal ganglia and its cortical connections in sequence learning: Evidence from implicit and explicit sequence learning in Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychologia, 47(12), 2564-2573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.05.003