Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026
Differential cortical responses to neuromuscular electrical vs. peripheral magnetic stimulation: a multimodal TMS-fNIRS study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yu Fengyun, Wang Weining, Xu Leyi, Liang Sijie, Hu Ruiping, Zhu Yulian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate cortical modulatory effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) applied to the wrist extensors of healthy adults, using fNIRS as the primary assessment modality.
METHODS: In a randomized crossover design, 15 right-handed adults received NMES and PMS sessions (separated by ≥48 h). Stimulation intensity was functionally calibrated to elicit a matched, maximal painless wrist dorsiflexion. Corticospinal excitability was assessed via motor evoked potentials (MEPs) before and after each intervention. Real-time cortical hemodynamics were monitored with functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) during stimulation, quantifying changes in oxygenated ([HbO]) and deoxygenated ([HbR]) hemoglobin concentrations across the sensorimotor (SMC), prefrontal (PFC), and occipital (OC) cortices.
RESULTS: Neither NMES nor PMS induced significant changes in MEP amplitude (NMES: p = 0.674; PMS: p = 0.794). However, fNIRS revealed fundamentally distinct cortical activation patterns during stimulation. NMES was associated with widespread decreases in [HbO] within the PFC, ipsilateral SMC, and OC (p < 0.05). In contrast, PMS elicited focal activation in the contralateral SMC, characterized by a significant increase in [HbO] (ch23: p = 0.005; ch35: p = 0.022) and a concurrent decrease in [HbR] (p < 0.05) compared to the NMES condition. General linear model analysis confirmed more robust contralateral SMC activation during PMS. No significant differences in task-based functional connectivity were observed between the two modalities.
CONCLUSIONS: A single session of NMES and PMS differentially modulates real-time cortical hemodynamics without altering corticospinal excitability. PMS induces focal, excitatory-dominant activation of the contralateral SMC, while NMES evokes a pattern of widespread cortical modulation, reflecting their distinct afferent mechanisms.
METHODS: In a randomized crossover design, 15 right-handed adults received NMES and PMS sessions (separated by ≥48 h). Stimulation intensity was functionally calibrated to elicit a matched, maximal painless wrist dorsiflexion. Corticospinal excitability was assessed via motor evoked potentials (MEPs) before and after each intervention. Real-time cortical hemodynamics were monitored with functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) during stimulation, quantifying changes in oxygenated ([HbO]) and deoxygenated ([HbR]) hemoglobin concentrations across the sensorimotor (SMC), prefrontal (PFC), and occipital (OC) cortices.
RESULTS: Neither NMES nor PMS induced significant changes in MEP amplitude (NMES: p = 0.674; PMS: p = 0.794). However, fNIRS revealed fundamentally distinct cortical activation patterns during stimulation. NMES was associated with widespread decreases in [HbO] within the PFC, ipsilateral SMC, and OC (p < 0.05). In contrast, PMS elicited focal activation in the contralateral SMC, characterized by a significant increase in [HbO] (ch23: p = 0.005; ch35: p = 0.022) and a concurrent decrease in [HbR] (p < 0.05) compared to the NMES condition. General linear model analysis confirmed more robust contralateral SMC activation during PMS. No significant differences in task-based functional connectivity were observed between the two modalities.
CONCLUSIONS: A single session of NMES and PMS differentially modulates real-time cortical hemodynamics without altering corticospinal excitability. PMS induces focal, excitatory-dominant activation of the contralateral SMC, while NMES evokes a pattern of widespread cortical modulation, reflecting their distinct afferent mechanisms.