Effects of short-latency afferent inhibition on short-interval intracortical inhibition

Peripheral nerve stimulation inhibits the motor cortex, and the process has been termed short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI) at interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of ∼20 ms. The objective of the present study was to test how SAI interacts with short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) under diff...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of neurophysiology 2014-03, Vol.111 (6), p.1350-1361
Main Authors: Udupa, Kaviraja, Ni, Zhen, Gunraj, Carolyn, Chen, Robert
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Afferent Pathways - physiology
Conditioning (Psychology)
Female
Humans
Male
Median Nerve - physiology
Motor Cortex - physiology
Muscle Contraction
Muscle, Skeletal - innervation
Muscle, Skeletal - physiology
Neural Inhibition
Reaction Time
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Peripheral nerve stimulation inhibits the motor cortex, and the process has been termed short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI) at interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of ∼20 ms. The objective of the present study was to test how SAI interacts with short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) under different stimulation conditions. We studied 20 healthy volunteers. Surface electromyogram was recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle. Using paired- and triple-pulse paradigms, we investigated how SAI interacts with SICI under these different conditions. The effects of different conditioning stimulus (CS) intensities (0.6-0.9 active motor threshold), SAI latencies (23 and 25 ms), and ISIs (2 and 3 ms) for SICI were examined in rest and active conditions. SAI had inhibitory interactions with SICI at different CS intensities for rest or active SICI, at SAI latencies of 23 and 25 ms. This interaction occurred at weak CS intensities for SICI when there was no inhibition, and SICI became facilitatory in the presence of SAI. This can be explained by SICI inhibiting SAI and not by saturation of inhibition. The interaction between SAI and SICI was greater for SICI at ISI of 3 ms than for ISI of 2 ms, suggesting that different circuits may be activated at these ISIs. We conclude that SAI and SICI have inhibitory interactions that are influenced by factors such as ISI and muscle activities, which should be considered in design and interpretation of cortical interaction studies.
ISSN:0022-3077
1522-1598
DOI:10.1152/jn.00613.2013