4.6 Article

Corticospinal excitability and conductivity are related to the anatomy of the corticospinal tract

Journal

BRAIN STRUCTURE & FUNCTION
Volume 227, Issue 3, Pages 1155-1164

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00429-021-02410-9

Keywords

Corticospinal tract; Corticospinal excitability; Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Tractography; TMS; Motor-evoked potentials

Funding

  1. MIUR (Dipartimenti di Eccellenza) [262]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study utilized advanced brain imaging techniques and neural stimulation methods to investigate the relationship between corticospinal excitability and anatomical structure. The findings suggest that inter-individual variability in anatomy can impact corticospinal activation and conduction, providing important insights into the understanding of TMS and the human motor system.
Probing the brain structure-function relationship is at the heart of modern neuroscientific explorations, enabled by recent advances in brain mapping techniques. This study aimed to explore the anatomical blueprint of corticospinal excitability and shed light on the structure-function relationship within the human motor system. Using diffusion magnetic resonance imaging tractography, based on the spherical deconvolution approach, and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we show that anatomical inter-individual variability of the corticospinal tract (CST) modulates the corticospinal excitability and conductivity. Our findings show for the first time the relationship between increased corticospinal excitability and conductivity in individuals with a bigger CST (i.e., number of streamlines), as well as increased corticospinal microstructural organization (i.e., fractional anisotropy). These findings can have important implications for the understanding of the neuroanatomical basis of TMS as well as the study of the human motor system in both health and disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available