Variability in neural excitability and plasticity induction in the human cortex: A brain stimulation study

- Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) offers opportunities to examine plasticity and induce functional change in the brain.
- However, at present the utility of NIBS is somewhat limited due to high response variability.
- Key to harnessing the potential of NIBS is to understand more fully the factors contributing to this variability.
- This variability may in part be determined by the relative excitability of different cortical networks activated by NIBS.
- This study provides new insights into the influence of cortical excitability on the response to a common NIBS protocol.

BackgroundThe potential of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for both probing human neuroplasticity and the induction of functionally relevant neuroplastic change has received significant interest. However, at present the utility of NIBS is limited due to high response variability. One reason for this response variability is that NIBS targets a diffuse cortical population and the net outcome to stimulation depends on the relative levels of excitability in each population. There is evidence that the relative excitability of complex oligosynaptic circuits (late I-wave circuits) as assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is useful in predicting NIBS response.ObjectiveHere we examined whether an additional marker of cortical excitability, MEP amplitude variability, could provide additional insights into response variability following application of the continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) NIBS protocol. Additionally we investigated whether I-wave recruitment was associated with MEP variability.MethodsThirty-four healthy subjects (15 male, aged 18-35 years) participated in two experiments. Experiment 1 investigated baseline MEP variability and cTBS response. Experiment 2 determined if I-wave recruitment was associated with MEP variability.ResultsData show that both baseline MEP variability and late I-wave recruitment are associated with cTBS response, but were independent of each other; together, these variables predict 31% of the variability in cTBS response.ConclusionsThis study provides insight into the physiological mechanisms underpinning NIBS plasticity responses and may facilitate development of more reliable NIBS protocols.