The responsiveness to non-invasive neuromodulation protocols shows high inter-individual variability, the reasons of which remain poorly understood. We here tested whether the response to intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) – an effective repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) protocol for increasing cortical excitability – depends on network properties of the cortical motor system. We furthermore investigated whether the responsiveness to iTBS is dose-dependent. To this end, we used a sham-stimulation controlled, single-blinded within-subject design testing for the relationship between iTBS aftereffects and (i) motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) as well as (ii) resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) in 16 healthy subjects. In each session, three blocks of iTBS were applied, separated by 15 min. We found that non-responders (subjects not showing an MEP increase of ≥10% after one iTBS block) featured stronger rsFC between the stimulated primary motor cortex (M1) and premotor areas before stimulation compared to responders. However, only the group of responders showed increases in rsFC and MEPs, while most non-responders remained close to baseline levels after all three blocks of iTBS. Importantly, there was still a large amount of variability in both groups. Our data suggest that responsiveness to iTBS at the local level (i.e., M1 excitability) depends upon the pre-interventional network connectivity of the stimulated region. Of note, increasing iTBS dose did not turn non-responders into responders. The finding that higher levels of pre-interventional connectivity precluded a response to iTBS could reflect a ceiling effect underlying non-responsiveness to iTBS at the systems level.

Stroke patients with motor deficits typically feature enhanced neural activity in several cortical areas when moving their affected hand. However, also healthy subjects may show higher levels of neural activity in tasks with higher motor demands. Therefore, the question arises to what extent stroke-related overactivity reflects performance-level-associated recruitment of neural resources rather than stroke-induced neural reorganization. We here investigated which areas in the lesioned brain enable the flexible adaption to varying motor demands compared to healthy subjects. Accordingly, eleven well-recovered left-hemispheric chronic stroke patients were scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Motor system activity was assessed for fist closures at increasing movement frequencies performed with the affected/right or unaffected/left hand. In patients, an increasing movement rate of the affected hand was associated with stronger neural activity in ipsilesional/left primary motor cortex (M1) but unlike in healthy controls also in contralesional/right dorsolateral premotor cortex (PMd) and contralesional/right superior parietal lobule (SPL). Connectivity analyses using dynamic causal modeling revealed stronger coupling of right SPL onto affected/left M1 in patients but not in controls when moving the affected/right hand independent of the movement speed. Furthermore, coupling of right SPL was positively coupled with the "active" ipsilesional/left M1 when stroke patients moved their affected/right hand with increasing movement frequency. In summary, these findings are compatible with a supportive role of right SPL with respect to motor function of the paretic hand in the reorganized brain.

Stroke patients suffering from hemiparesis may show substantial recovery in the first months poststroke due to neural reorganization. While reorganization driving improvement of upper hand motor function has been frequently investigated, much less is known about the changes underlying recovery of lower limb function. We, therefore, investigated neural network dynamics giving rise to movements of both the hands and feet in 12 well‐recovered left‐hemispheric chronic stroke patients and 12 healthy participants using a functional magnetic resonance imaging sparse sampling design and dynamic causal modeling (DCM). We found that the level of neural activity underlying movements of the affected right hand and foot positively correlated with residual motor impairment, in both ipsilesional and contralesional premotor as well as left primary motor (M1) regions. Furthermore, M1 representations of the affected limb showed significantly stronger increase in BOLD activity compared to healthy controls and compared to the respective other limb. DCM revealed reduced endogenous connectivity of M1 of both limbs in patients compared to controls. However, when testing for the specific effect of movement on interregional connectivity, interhemispheric inhibition of the contralesional M1 during movements of the affected hand was not detected in patients whereas no differences in condition‐dependent connectivity were found for foot movements compared to controls. In contrast, both groups featured positive interhemispheric M1 coupling, that is, facilitation of neural activity, mediating movements of the affected foot. These exploratory findings help to explain why functional recovery of the upper and lower limbs often develops differently after stroke, supporting limb‐specific rehabilitative strategies.