4.5 Article

Older adults exhibit more intracortical inhibition and less intracortical facilitation than young adults

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL GERONTOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 9, Pages 671-678

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2010.04.005

Keywords

Transcranial magnetic stimulation; Muscle; Motor evoked potential; Aging; Sarcopenia; Dynapenia; Electromyography

Funding

  1. Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine
  2. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute Of Child Health & Human Development [R15HD065552]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Aging results in decreased neuromuscular function, which is likely associated with neurologic alterations. At present little is known regarding age-related changes in intracortical properties. Methods: In this study we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to measure intracortical facilitation (ICE), short- and long-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI and LICI), motor evoked potential amplitude, and silent period duration in young and older adults (21.4 +/- 0.8 years and 70.9 +/- 1.8 years). These variables were assessed from the flexor carpi radialis muscle of the non-dominant arm under resting conditions, and during a submaximal contraction (intensity 15% maximum strength). Results: Older adults exhibited increased SICI and LICI in comparison to young adults (SICI: 29.0 +/- 9.2% vs. 46.2 +/- 4.8% of unconditioned pulse; LICI: 6.5 +/- 1.7% vs. 15.8 +/- 3.3% of unconditioned pulse; P = 0.04), and less ICF under resting conditions (74.6 +/- 8.7% vs. 104.9 +/- 6.9% of unconditioned pulse; P = 0.02). These agerelated differences disappeared during contraction, although the older adults did exhibit a longer silent period during contraction (112.5 +/- 6.5 vs. 84.0 +/- 3.9 ms; P<0.01). Conclusions: Collectively, these findings suggest increased GABA mediated intracortical inhibition with age. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available