Closed-Loop rTMS Induces Frequency-Specific Cortical Network Reorganization Distinct from Open-Loop Stimulation in Healthy Humans
Carparelli, F.; Simonetta, C.; Mascioli, D.; Ferrari, V.; Bagetta, S.; Conti, C.; Centonze, D.; Schirinzi, T.; Guerra, A.; Stefani, A.; Pierantozzi, M.; Conti, M.
Show abstract
Objective: To determine whether mu-phase-locked closed-loop repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) induces distinct changes in corticospinal excitability and large-scale cortical functional connectivity (FC) compared with conventional open-loop stimulation. Methods: Ten healthy volunteers underwent randomized, single-blind closed-loop, open-loop, and sham sessions in a crossover design. Closed-loop rTMS targeted the left primary motor cortex and was synchronized with the predicted negative peak of the individual mu rhythm; open-loop stimulation was delivered at 10 Hz. Each active session comprised 1,500 pulses. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and resting-state high-density EEG were acquired before and after stimulation. Source-space weighted phase-lag index connectivity was analyzed across canonical frequency bands using the Network-Based Statistic. Results: Both active protocols increased corticospinal excitability relative to baseline, whereas sham stimulation did not. The MEP increase was greater after closed-loop than open-loop stimulation (143.3+-13.6% vs 132.5+-16.0%; p=0.031). Open-loop rTMS reduced alpha-band FC. Closed-loop rTMS similarly reduced alpha-band FC but additionally increased beta- and high-gamma-band connectivity. Direct comparisons of individual FC changes confirmed significantly greater beta- and high-gamma increases after closed-loop than after open-loop stimulation, whereas alpha-band changes did not differ between the protocols. No significant changes in FC occurred after sham stimulation. Conclusions: mu-phase-locked closed-loop rTMS enhanced corticospinal facilitation and induced broader, frequency-specific network reorganization than 10 Hz open-loop stimulation. Significance: These preliminary findings indicate that stimulation timing relative to the ongoing cortical state may critically shape both local excitability and distributed network plasticity, supporting the further development of brain-state-dependent neuromodulation in future, larger, phase-controlled clinical studies.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The phase of sensorimotor mu and beta oscillations has the opposite effect on corticospinal excitability 96%
- Transferability of cathodal tDCS effects from the primary motor to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: a multimodal TMS-EEG study 96%
- Personalized whole-brain activity patterns predict human corticospinal tract activation in real-time 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease Induces Spontaneous Cortical Hypersynchrony In Extended Motor and Cognitive Networks 95%
- Connectivity Gradient in the Human Left Inferior Frontal Gyrus: Intraoperative Cortico-Cortical Evoked Potential Study 95%
- Reliability of the TMS-evoked potential in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Phase-synchronized 40Hz tACS and iTBS effects on gamma oscillations 96%
- Characterising the contribution of auditory and somatosensory inputs to TMS-evoked potentials following stimulation of prefrontal, premotor and parietal cortex 96%
- Extracting Reproducible Components from Electroencephalographic Responses to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation with Group Task-Related Component Analysis 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transcranial ultrasound stimulation effect in the redundant and synergistic networks consistent across macaques 95%
- Altered correlation of concurrently recorded EEG-fMRI connectomes in temporal lobe epilepsy 93%
- Thalamocortical interactions reflecting the intensity of flicker light-induced visual hallucinatory phenomena 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.