Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Recent studies have identified new neurobiological biomarker (i.e. functional connectivity of the parietal cortex) of motor learning among healthy people. This enables to refine our current model of motor learning wherein specific cortical processes are key factors for motor acquisition. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that new technical approaches such as repetitive magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can efficiently influence this key factor. However, up to now, no rTMS studies have target this new biomarker. Therefore, the effect of rTMS are unknown. Hence, the investigators want to develop a new rTMS setup able to induce specific brain processes in healthy individuals that are likely to benefit. This has the potential to obtain critical information in order to improve treatment of motor re-learning in patients with neurological diseases.
Participants will participate in 1 session of neuronavigated (TMS Navigator, Localite, Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757, Sankt Augustin, Germany ) iTBS (patterned form of rTMS) coupled with motor learning. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of 2 groups: real iTBS over parietal cortex and sham iTBS over the parietal cortex.
One day before (Day1) and after the motor learning (Day 2), participants will undergo high-density 128-channel resting state electroencephalography (EEG) and motor evoked potential (MEP) in order to characterize the effects of rTMS on our markers of plasticity. Performance on the task will be measure immediately after learning (Day 2) and again 24h later (Day 3) in order to test for retention and offline consolidation (time and errors). The task will consist in realizing a computerized mirror-drawing task, in which right-left movements of the mouse were reversed on the screen.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intermittent theta burst stimulation | Active Comparator | Volunteers will be submitted to non-invasive parietal stimulation before a mirror drawing task. A transcranial magnetic stimulator (MagPro X100, Medtronic Functional Diagnostics, Skovlunde, Denmark) will deliver interrmittent bursts of bipolar magnetic pulses exerting an excitation on the underlying brain tissue (iTBS). The stimulation coil will be placed over the parietal cortex. Stimulation consisted of a burst of three pulses administered at 50Hz, repeated at a frequency of 5Hz, delivered in 2 s trains followed by an 8 s interval for a total of 600 pulses12. Stimulation intensity was set at 70% of RMT. Each session will consist of two spaced neuronavigated iTBS applications, separated by 15 minutes. |
|
| Sham intermittent theta burst stimulation | Sham Comparator | For sham iTBS, the protocol is the same, except the sham coil produces no magnetic field. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rTMS device | Device | Participants will participate in 1 session of neuronavigated (TMS Navigator, Localite, Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757, Sankt Augustin, Germany ) iTBS (patterned form of TMS) coupled with motor learning. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Motor performance in consolidation test | Difference in error rate and speed improvement in active and sham groups (learned task) | after training (Day 3) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Resting state EEG connectivity in active and sham groups | Calculated from electroencephalography recordings | Before (Day 1) and after training (Day 2) |
| Motor Evoked Potential (MEPs) Amplitudes (peak to peak) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Motor performance in retention test | Difference in error rate and speed improvement in active and sham groups (learned task) | After training (Day 2) |
| Motor performance in transfer test | Difference in error rate and speed improvement in active and sham groups (non-learned) task) |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pierre Nicolo, PhD | Contact | +41 (0)22 372 38 76 | pierre.nicolo@hcuge.ch | |
| Pierre Nicolo, PhD | Contact | +41792633543 | nicolopierre@gmail.com |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Adrian Guggisberg, Prof. Dr. | University Hospital, Geneva | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pierre Nicolo | Recruiting | Geneva | 1211 | Switzerland |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Difference in MEPs between active and sham groups. MEPs are generated when stimulation of the brain on the motor cortex (with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation [TMS]) causes the spinal cord and peripheral muscles to produce neuroelectrical signals. MEPs are typically measured in the hand muscles (Abductor pollicis brevis ).
| Before (Day 1) and after training (Day 2) |
| after training (Day 2 and Day 3) |