Driving associative plasticity in premotor-motor connections through a novel paired associative stimulation based on long-latency cortico-cortical interactions

Please, don't do it! Fifteen years of progress of non-invasive brain stimulation in action inhibition

“…Moreover, it needs to be taken into account that tDCS have been found to produce spatially widespread electric fields (EF) on the cerebral cortex, hence, individual modeling is required to plan EF doses when focal montages are used (Mikkonen, Laakso, Tanaka, & Hirata, 2020). Beside this limitation, several progresses have been achieved in the last fifteen years in healthy participants, however future studies should assess not only the critical role of the single nodes of the AIN but also their interactions by studying their effective connectivity (Zanon, Borgomaneri, & Avenanti, 2018) and/or their causal interactions (Chiappini et al, 2020;Fiori et al, 2017Fiori et al, , 2016. All this information is fundamental to carefully assess the clinical and applied potentialities of NIBS in clinical populations (Plewnia, Schroeder, & Wolkenstein, 2015).…”

Modulating Frontal Networks’ Timing-Dependent-Like Plasticity With Paired Associative Stimulation Protocols: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives

“…We suggest that the answer is not so straight-forward, and further research is needed. Indeed, as already proved for PAS targeting sensory-motor networks (e.g., Koch et al, 2013;Chiappini et al, 2018Chiappini et al, , 2020Zazio et al, 2019;Maddaluno et al, 2020), different confounding factors, which are likely to be more involved in protocols targeting complex networkse.g., bidirectional interplay within and between cortical regions, activation state of the stimulated network, participants' attention and expectancy during the protocol's administration -can influence the effectiveness of PAS' ISIs and, in a broader perspective, the effectiveness of the PAS. For instance, due to the augmented complexity of the cortico-cortical pathways activated by cc-PAS, the temporal windows (i.e., range of effective ISIs) to induce excitatory/inhibitory changes may be wider and less strict than in PAS targeting primary sensory systems (e.g., Wolters et al, 2003Wolters et al, , 2005.…”

“…At variance with paired-pulse TMS, cc-PAS protocols can modulate the weight of the coupling between the two target areas, likely through the induction of associative plasticity (Koch, 2020). The first studies adopting the cc-PAS have focused on the motor system (e.g., Rizzo et al, 2009;Arai et al, 2011;Buch et al, 2011;Lu et al, 2012;Koch et al, 2013;Veniero et al, 2013;Chiappini et al, 2020) and the visual system (Romei et al, 2016;Chiappini et al, 2018), proving the effectiveness of these protocols in modulating cortico-cortical connectivity at a neurophysiological and behavioral level. More recently, cc-PAS was used to target high-order frontal areas of the human brain, allowing the study of connectivity and plasticity within complex systems crucial for cognition.…”

Cortico-cortical connectivity is influenced by levodopa in tremor-dominant Parkinson’s disease

“…Together, these findings add to our understanding of neural networks implicated in PD and provide a neurophysiological platform to develop interventions to reduce tremor severity. For example, cortical paired associative stimulation (cPAS) could be used to modulate cortico-cortical activity, as cPAS has previously shown to strengthen connectivity (via long-term potentiation-like plasticity) or weaken connectivity (via long-term depression-like plasticity) between motor brain areas 93-96 . cPAS has been used to transiently strengthen the facilitatory connection between SMA and M1 in young adults 24 and, therefore, cPAS could be used in PD to strengthen SMA-M1 facilitation which might improve tremor severity.…”