Theta Burst Stimulation Modulates Exercise Performance by Influencing Central Fatigue and Corticospinal Excitability.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI:10.1249/MSS.0000000000003611
Camilla Martignon, Chiara Barbi, Gianluca Vernillo, Simranjit K Sidhu, Mehran Emadi Andani, Federico Schena, Massimo Venturelli
{"title":"Theta Burst Stimulation Modulates Exercise Performance by Influencing Central Fatigue and Corticospinal Excitability.","authors":"Camilla Martignon, Chiara Barbi, Gianluca Vernillo, Simranjit K Sidhu, Mehran Emadi Andani, Federico Schena, Massimo Venturelli","doi":"10.1249/MSS.0000000000003611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Theta-burst stimulation (TBS) over the primary motor cortex modulates activity of the underlying neural tissue, but little is known about its consequence on neuromuscular fatigue (NMF) and its neural correlates. This study aimed to compare the effects of facilitatory versus inhibitory TBS on the NMF and excitability/inhibition of the corticospinal pathway in an unfatigued/fatigued muscle.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The effects of three TBS protocols (facilitatory/intermittent: iTBS; inhibitory/continuous: cTBS, and sham: sTBS) were tested on exercise performance, neuromuscular function, corticospinal excitability and inhibition in twenty young healthy participants. Transcranial magnetic and peripheral electrical stimulations were used at baseline, following TBS (unfatigued state), and after a fatiguing sustained contraction (fatigued state) at 35% of the maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of the elbow flexors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Time-to-task failure was shorter for cTBS (142±51 s) and longer for iTBS (214±68 s) compared with sTBS (173±65 s) (P < .05). In an unfatigued state, cTBS reduced MVIC and voluntary activation (VA), increased motor-evoked potential (MEP), and silent period (SP) (P < 0.05), while iTBS did not cause any change. In a fatigued state, MVIC and VA decreased in all TBS sessions (P < 0.05). However, the reduction in VA was larger after cTBS (Δ-18±18%) compared with iTBS (Δ-3±5%), and sTBS (Δ-9±9%) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the increase in MEP and SP were greater for cTBS (P < .05), compared to iTBS and sTBS (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Facilitatory TBS augments exercise performance that is independent of central parameters and corticospinal mechanisms whilst inhibitory TBS attenuates exercise performance through an exacerbation in the development of central fatigue and possibly intracortical inhibition.</p>","PeriodicalId":18426,"journal":{"name":"Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000003611","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Theta-burst stimulation (TBS) over the primary motor cortex modulates activity of the underlying neural tissue, but little is known about its consequence on neuromuscular fatigue (NMF) and its neural correlates. This study aimed to compare the effects of facilitatory versus inhibitory TBS on the NMF and excitability/inhibition of the corticospinal pathway in an unfatigued/fatigued muscle.

Methods: The effects of three TBS protocols (facilitatory/intermittent: iTBS; inhibitory/continuous: cTBS, and sham: sTBS) were tested on exercise performance, neuromuscular function, corticospinal excitability and inhibition in twenty young healthy participants. Transcranial magnetic and peripheral electrical stimulations were used at baseline, following TBS (unfatigued state), and after a fatiguing sustained contraction (fatigued state) at 35% of the maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of the elbow flexors.

Results: Time-to-task failure was shorter for cTBS (142±51 s) and longer for iTBS (214±68 s) compared with sTBS (173±65 s) (P < .05). In an unfatigued state, cTBS reduced MVIC and voluntary activation (VA), increased motor-evoked potential (MEP), and silent period (SP) (P < 0.05), while iTBS did not cause any change. In a fatigued state, MVIC and VA decreased in all TBS sessions (P < 0.05). However, the reduction in VA was larger after cTBS (Δ-18±18%) compared with iTBS (Δ-3±5%), and sTBS (Δ-9±9%) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the increase in MEP and SP were greater for cTBS (P < .05), compared to iTBS and sTBS (P < .05).

Conclusions: Facilitatory TBS augments exercise performance that is independent of central parameters and corticospinal mechanisms whilst inhibitory TBS attenuates exercise performance through an exacerbation in the development of central fatigue and possibly intracortical inhibition.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
θ脉冲刺激通过影响中枢疲劳和皮质脊髓兴奋性调节运动表现
目的:对初级运动皮层的θ-脉冲刺激(TBS)可调节下层神经组织的活动,但人们对其对神经肌肉疲劳(NMF)及其神经相关性的影响知之甚少。本研究旨在比较促进性和抑制性 TBS 对未疲劳/疲劳肌肉的 NMF 和皮质脊髓通路的兴奋性/抑制性的影响:方法:测试了三种 TBS 方案(促进性/间歇性:iTBS;抑制性/持续性:cTBS 和假性:sTBS)对 20 名年轻健康参与者的运动表现、神经肌肉功能、皮质脊髓兴奋性和抑制性的影响。在基线、TBS 后(未疲劳状态)和肘关节屈肌最大自主等长收缩(MVIC)35% 的疲劳持续收缩(疲劳状态)后使用经颅磁刺激和外周电刺激:与 sTBS(173±65 秒)相比,cTBS(142±51 秒)和 iTBS(214±68 秒)的任务失败时间更短(P < .05)。在未疲劳状态下,cTBS 降低了 MVIC 和自主激活 (VA),增加了运动诱发电位 (MEP) 和沉默期 (SP)(P < 0.05),而 iTBS 没有引起任何变化。在疲劳状态下,MVIC 和 VA 在所有 TBS 训练中都有所下降(P < 0.05)。然而,与 iTBS(Δ-3±5%)和 sTBS(Δ-9±9%)相比,cTBS(Δ-18±18%)的 VA 下降幅度更大(P < 0.001)。此外,与 iTBS 和 sTBS(P < .05)相比,cTBS 的 MEP 和 SP 增幅更大(P < .05):结论:促进性 TBS 可提高运动成绩,这与中枢参数和皮质脊髓机制无关,而抑制性 TBS 则会通过加剧中枢疲劳的发展和可能的皮质内抑制来降低运动成绩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
4.90%
发文量
2568
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise® features original investigations, clinical studies, and comprehensive reviews on current topics in sports medicine and exercise science. With this leading multidisciplinary journal, exercise physiologists, physiatrists, physical therapists, team physicians, and athletic trainers get a vital exchange of information from basic and applied science, medicine, education, and allied health fields.
期刊最新文献
Investigating the Influence of Limb Blood Flow on Contraction-Induced Muscle Growth and the Impact of that Growth on Changes in Maximal Strength. Is the Force-Velocity Profile for Free Jumping a Sound Basis for Individualized Jump Training Prescriptions? Comparing Step Counting Algorithms for High-Resolution Wrist Accelerometry Data in NHANES 2011-2014. Physical Activity Declines over a 12-Month Period in Parkinson's Disease: Considerations for Longitudinal Activity Monitoring. Varus Strength of the Medial Elbow Musculature for Stress Shielding of the Ulnar Collateral Ligament in Competitive Baseball Pitchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1