Europe PMC
Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Europe PMC requires Javascript to function effectively.

Either your web browser doesn't support Javascript or it is currently turned off. In the latter case, please turn on Javascript support in your web browser and reload this page.

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

The Supplementary Motor Complex in Parkinson's Disease.

Author information

Affiliations

  • 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
      Authors
    • Rahimpour S 1
    (1 author)
  • 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, USA.
      Authors
    • Rajkumar S 2
    (1 author)
  • 3. Human Motor Control Section, Medical Neurology Branch, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
      Authors
    • Hallett M 3
    (1 author)

ORCIDs linked to this article

Journal of Movement Disorders, 25 Nov 2021, 15(1):21-32
https://doi.org/10.14802/jmd.21075 PMID: 34814237 PMCID: PMC8820882

Review

This article is in the Europe PMC Open access subset. Refer to the copyright information in the article for licensing details.
Free full text in Europe PMC

Abstract 

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by both motor and nonmotor symptoms. Although the basal ganglia is traditionally the primary brain region implicated in this disease process, this limited view ignores the roles of the cortex and cerebellum that are networked with the basal ganglia to support motor and cognitive functions. In particular, recent research has highlighted dysfunction in the supplementary motor complex (SMC) in patients with PD. Using the PubMed and Google Scholar search engines, we identified research articles using keywords pertaining to the involvement of the SMC in action sequencing impairments, temporal processing disturbances, and gait impairment in patients with PD. A review of abstracts and full-text articles was used to identify relevant articles. In this review of 63 articles, we focus on the role of the SMC in PD, highlighting anatomical and functional data to create new perspectives in understanding clinical symptoms and, potentially, new therapeutic targets. The SMC has a nuanced role in the pathophysiology of PD, with both hypo- and hyperactivation associated with various symptoms. Further studies using more standardized patient populations and functional tasks are needed to more clearly elucidate the role of this region in the pathophysiology and treatment of PD.

Free full text 

Logo of jmovedisJournal of Movement DisordersThis ArticleAims and ScopeInstructions to Authorse-Submission
J Mov Disord. 2022 Jan; 15(1): 21–32.
Published online 2021 Nov 25. https://doi.org/10.14802/jmd.21075
PMCID: PMC8820882
PMID: 34814237

The Supplementary Motor Complex in Parkinson’s Disease

Shervin Rahimpour, 1 Shashank Rajkumar, 2 and Mark Hallett 3
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer

Abstract

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by both motor and nonmotor symptoms. Although the basal ganglia is traditionally the primary brain region implicated in this disease process, this limited view ignores the roles of the cortex and cerebellum that are networked with the basal ganglia to support motor and cognitive functions. In particular, recent research has highlighted dysfunction in the supplementary motor complex (SMC) in patients with PD. Using the PubMed and Google Scholar search engines, we identified research articles using keywords pertaining to the involvement of the SMC in action sequencing impairments, temporal processing disturbances, and gait impairment in patients with PD. A review of abstracts and full-text articles was used to identify relevant articles. In this review of 63 articles, we focus on the role of the SMC in PD, highlighting anatomical and functional data to create new perspectives in understanding clinical symptoms and, potentially, new therapeutic targets. The SMC has a nuanced role in the pathophysiology of PD, with both hypo- and hyperactivation associated with various symptoms. Further studies using more standardized patient populations and functional tasks are needed to more clearly elucidate the role of this region in the pathophysiology and treatment of PD.

Keywords: Gait impairment, Parkinson’s disease, Sequence effect, Supplementary motor area, Supplementary motor complex, Temporal processing

INTRODUCTION

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disorder characterized by a constellation of motor and nonmotor symptoms, including resting tremor, bradykinesia, rigidity, impaired gait, and behavioral and cognitive dysfunctions. The pathological hallmarks of this constellation include a progressive loss of neurons in the substantia nigra with dopaminergic denervation of the striatum and intracytoplasmic inclusions of α-synuclein, known as Lewy bodies [1]. The traditional model of PD predicts that the loss of dopaminergic neurons in the parkinsonian state leads to increased inhibition of the indirect pathway and decreased activation of the direct pathway, causing net overactivation of the basal ganglia (BG) output [2]. This view deserves merit; to date, theoretical and empirical approaches to the treatment of PD have focused on alterations in the BG [2,3]. The BG, however, is only one part of brain networks that work to support both motor and cognitive functions, and BG-cortical-cerebellar anatomical and functional circuits are fundamental for motor tasks, sensorimotor mapping, working memory, and reasoning [4-7]. Furthermore, the traditional model of PD pathophysiology fails to comprehensively account for all symptoms of PD, such as postural imbalances and sequential motor impairments.

Recent findings have been summarized in a theoretical framework for understanding the pathology of PD as a system-level dysfunction of the BG–cortex–cerebellum network that is not limited to the traditional paradigm of BG dysfunction alone [8]. These data have also stimulated research investigating the role of cortical areas in impairments associated with PD. For example, patients with PD commonly exhibit decreased activity in the supplementary motor complex (SMC), which improves with dopamine replacement therapy and deep brain stimulation (DBS) [9-11]. Pathologically, patients also have selective loss of pyramidal neurons of the presupplementary motor area (pre-SMA) [12]. A recent review also highlighted the pathological and compensatory effects of the cerebellum on PD [13]. In summary, studies have documented the importance of other critical areas involved in PD in addition to the BG in isolation, specifically the BG-cortex-cerebellum circuitry. Here, we focus on the role of the SMC. In this review, we discuss the functional and physical anatomy of the SMC in the context of PD, highlighting studies from both humans and monkeys. Specifically, we discuss three key symptoms of PD—action sequencing impairments, temporal processing, and gait impairment—in the context of SMC function, given its crucial role in linking cognition to action. The purpose of this review is to synthesize new perspectives for understanding PD with the ultimate goal of identifying the SMC as a potential target for innovative therapeutic approaches.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed database and Google Scholar for relevant articles. The SMC is known to be involved in a variety of processes, including certain types of movement, executive control, and learning [14]. However, we targeted search terms to the three aforementioned symptoms (i.e., action sequence and gait impairment, and temporal processing), as they are specific symptoms of PD that have been associated with SMC dysfunction. Furthermore, searches were performed using search terms relevant to treatments for PD involving the SMC.

In PubMed, the following search terms were used: (((Supplementary motor cortex) OR (supplementary motor area) OR (SMA) OR (SMC)) AND (Parkinson’s Disease)) AND (Treatment); (“temporal processing”) AND (“supplementary motor area”); ((“supplementary motor area” OR “supplementary motor cortex” OR “SMA”) AND (Parkinson’s Disease)) AND (sequential motor); (“Supplementary Motor Area” OR “Supplementary Motor Complex” OR “Supplementary Motor Cortex”) AND (Parkinson’s Disease). After limiting the search to the English language, 2,510 results were retrieved. Additionally, the following search terms were used in Google Scholar: “Supplementary motor area motor sequences imaging”; “Supplementary motor area” AND (“temporal processing” OR “time”) AND “supplementary motor area”; “Supplementary Motor Area” AND “gait” AND “Parkinson’s.” The results were limited to English, and the first 50 articles were evaluated for each search. No articles were excluded based on the publication date because, to our knowledge, no review has previously been published that details the role of the SMA in PD. We then reviewed the resulting 2,657 results for relevance to the present subject matter. Sixty-three articles were identified as relevant and were included in our discussion. This methodology is summarized in Figure 1.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is jmd-21075f1.jpg

Summary diagram reviewing search methods and number of articles included and excluded from the analysis.

Anatomical connections between the BG and SMC

The SMC is comprised of two functionally and cyto- and chemoarchitectonically distinct regions: the supplementary motor area (SMA) and the pre-SMA [15-20]. Early electrical stimulation studies placed these regions in the medial portion of Brodmann’s area 6 [21]. Both the SMA and pre-SMA are located in the superior frontal gyrus, rostral to the primary motor area in Brodmann’s areas 6aα and 6aβ, respectively [22]. A third region termed the supplementary eye field (SEF) lies between the SMA and pre-SMA in the upper part of the paracentral sulcus [23]. Based on more extensive human and animal studies, including clinical series, intraoperative mapping, functional and anatomical neuroimaging, and cadaveric fiber dissection, these regions have been shown to form connections with the BG, cerebellum, limbic system, thalamus, superior parietal lobe, other regions of the frontal lobe, and spinal cord [24-26]. Although they are neighboring regions, the SMA and pre-SMA exhibit differences in connectivity and functionality [15] and are not directly connected to each other [24]. The SMA sends dense direct projections to the primary motor cortex (M1) and spinal cord [27-30]. The pre-SMA, unlike the SMA, sends minimal projections to the corticospinal tract and lacks reciprocal connections with M1 [31-33]. Rather, the pre-SMA has dense connections with other areas of the prefrontal cortex [34]. Both the SMA and pre-SMA are connected with the striatum, although these projections appear to be distinct circuits [35]. Consistent with this difference in connectivity, researchers have postulated that the SMA is mainly involved in tasks relating to motor planning and execution, whereas the pre-SMA is mainly associated with cognitive processes [36]; however, the exact roles of each of these subdivisions are still under investigation. Here, we will focus on SMC connections to the BG and cerebellum in the context of PD. All areas of the SMC are targets of the BG and cerebellum [24], although the SMC receives relatively more input from the BG than the cerebellum. These projections are derived from the internal segment of the globus pallidus (GPi) via the direct and indirect pathways and the dentate nucleus via the thalamus. Regarding the cerebellum, the SMA and pre-SMA also receive inputs from spatially separate and neurochemically distinct regions of the dentate nucleus via the thalamus [24]. The pre-SMA receives input from the ventral dentate nucleus, while SMA input is more dorsal. These two subregions of the dentate nucleus designate nonmotor (ventral, pre-SMA projections) and motor (dorsal, SMA projections) domains [37]. Additionally, the hyperdirect pathway connects the SMC and the subthalamic nucleus (STN), which in turn modulates GPi activity [38]. The hyperdirect pathway is proposed to play a role in rapidly “braking” ongoing cortical-BG activity [39]. The anatomy and connectivity of the SMC are summarized in Figure 2.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is jmd-21075f2.jpg

Functional and gross anatomy of the SMC, basal ganglia (hyperdirect, direct and indirect pathways) and cerebellum via the thalamus. The VCA anatomically separates the pre-SMA and SMA. Notably, the pre-SMA and SMA have distinct connectivity profiles. F/M, face/mouth; UL, upper limb; LL, lower limb; SMA, supplementary motor area; pre-SMA, presupplementary motor area; M1, primary motor cortex; PFC, prefrontal cortex; GPe, external segment of globus pallidus, GPi, internal segment of the globus pallidus, STN, subthalamic nucleus; DN, dentate nucleus; VCA, vertical axis of the brain in Talairach space.

Neurophysiology and functional imaging

Given the motor and nonmotor projections of the SMC, this cortical region may play a role in the pathophysiology of various PD symptoms. Although SMC dysfunction has been associated with symptoms such as fatigue [40], it is most commonly associated with deficits in motor preparation and execution. Here, we discuss the current state of the literature describing the role of SMC dysfunction in patients with PD as it relates to impairments of sequential movements, temporal processing, and gait. Notably, the SMC is not solely responsible for these symptoms; rather, altered interactions between the SMC and other brain areas are likely important and warrant consideration when describing circuit-level dysfunction in patients with PD. A summary of these findings is provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Summary of neurophysiology and imaging findings

Action sequencing impairmentTemporal processingGait impairment
SMC lesionsInfarct → errors in sequential movementsLesion → Increased reaction time, decreased ability to recall rhythmInfarct → gait apraxia
SMC stimulationInduces errors in sequential movementsNo effect/worsens temporal processingImproves gait
Functional imaging↑SMA activation↑/↓ SMA activation↓Pre-SMA activation in FOG
↓Pre-SMA activation↑Pre-SMA activation

The effects of SMC lesions and SMC stimulation on action sequencing impairment, temporal processing, and gait impairment. Overall, SMC lesions worsen performance on these tasks, while stimulation may worsen action sequences and temporal processing but improve gait impairment. Functional imaging reveals differential activation of the SMA and pre-SMA when these tasks are performed. SMC, supplementary motor complex; SMA, supplementary motor area; pre-SMA, presupplementary motor area; FOG, freezing of gait.

Action sequencing impairments

Impairments in action sequencing are a motor deficit characterized by a slowing of sequential movements and are a common symptom of PD. In particular, when performing sequential actions, patients with PD often exhibit slowing movements and decreased amplitudes of motion, known as the sequence effect [41]. Although the physiology of the sequence effect remains unclear, this particular symptom does not completely improve with levodopa therapy, suggesting dysfunction not only in the BG but also in other brain regions, such as functionally connected cortical regions, including the SMC and the cerebellum [41]. In primate models, a series of studies has made a case not only for the participation of the SMC in motor sequences but also for different functional roles of the SMA and pre-SMA. In both areas, cells have been discovered that respond specifically to a forthcoming sequence of movements when guided by memory [42,43]. Indeed, an injection of a γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) agonist into either the SMA or pre-SMA induced errors in memorized motor sequences but not in nonsequential movements, and these errors were corrected by providing visual cues [44]. Finally, the monkey pre-SMA contains more neurons concerned with the rank order of movements within a particular sequence, whereas the SMA proper contains more “interval-selective” neurons that link different movements within a sequence [43,45], showing that these areas are specialized to sequence movements in different ways. Furthermore, as both the pre-SMA and SMA are connected to the cerebellum via the thalamus, the cerebellum may also assist in motor sequences by contributing anticipatory activation. By anticipating future events at fast temporal scales, the cerebellum provides a feed-forward model [46,47]. The activation of pre-SMA and SMA neurons then regulates STN activation via the hyperdirect pathway with respect to the anticipated movement. Given the role of the hyperdirect pathways in movement inhibition, this signal may demarcate the end of a previous movement. As a result, anticipatory activation of the STN (bypassing the striatum with shorter conduction time) for the next movement does not occur, therefore impairing action sequencing [8].

Similarly, in healthy humans, the SMC plays an important role in the coordination of motor sequences [48]. Increased positron emission tomography (PET) activation of the SMA is observed in healthy adults performing sequential finger movements compared to repetitive finger movements [49]. Interestingly, no further increase in SMA activity is observed as the sequences are lengthened, implicating the SMA in a separate circuit for the coordination of sequential movements, regardless of the length of these sequences. Other functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and PET-based studies have also shown greater SMA activation when participants perform sequential finger movements than repetitive, nonsequential finger movements [50,51], regardless of whether the sequential activity was performed or imagined [51]. Importantly, higher levels of complexity also activate the SMA. Toyokura et al. [52] detected an increased fMRI signal in the SMA when sequential finger movements were performed with both hands compared with either hand alone, potentially suggesting that tasks requiring increased coordination require greater SMA activity. Lesion and stimulation studies also implicate the SMA in the organization of motor sequences. For instance, Gerloff et al. [53] reported that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the SMA induces errors in the performance of a prelearned complex sequence of finger movements on a piano but not on simpler sequences. Similarly, Dick et al. [54] reported a case of a patient with an SMA infarct who had difficulty performing sequential tasks, similar to the sequence deficits observed in patients with PD. Together, this evidence suggests that sequential movements require a separate circuit for coordination and possibly execution compared to simple motor processes, and the SMA is an important part of this network.

Unsurprisingly, neuroimaging studies involving patients with PD have shown that SMC dysfunction correlates with a deficit in performing sequential movements. However, in contrast to the lesion studies described above, evidence suggests that PD causes a more nuanced, circuit-level dysfunction involving the SMA. For instance, Thobois et al. [55] showed persistent activation of the SMA in patients with PD compared to healthy controls when a sequential motor task was imagined with the akinetic hand but not with the normal hand. Although the task was imagined, evidence suggests that common circuits are employed both for motor imagery and motor execution [56]. Furthermore, several studies have documented hypoactivation of the pre-SMA in patients with PD compared to healthy controls [57,58]. Meanwhile, the SMA proper is normally activated or hyperactivated in patients with PD [55,57,59], although this finding is not consistently reported [58]. This result describing SMA hyperactivation seems to contradict lesion studies in which a lack of function of the SMA correlated with sequence deficits. It also seems to contradict the result that patients with PD display SMA hypoactivation at rest compared to healthy controls [60]. Several potential explanations for this disparity have been proposed. Current studies are limited by small sample sizes, varying complexity of motor tasks, and the investigation of patients with variable disease subtypes and severities. Additionally, conflicting results regarding SMA activation may also be attributed to poor spatial resolution, as recording hyperactivation from the SMA proper and hypoactivation from the pre-SMA as one signal might skew the results. This possibility is particularly important because the pre-SMA becomes activated in movement preparation, whereas the SMA proper is activated during both movement preparation and execution [61,62], implicating these areas in distinct circuits. Finally, another explanation for the mixed pattern of SMC dysfunction is that compensatory networks in patients with PD might be responsible for the conflicting results, and these networks may become activated during different disease stages. For example, the cerebellum is hyperactivated and shows strengthened connectivity in patients with PD. Weakened striato-thalamo-cortical and striato-cerebellar connectivity in patients with PD compared to healthy control subjects may lead to compensatory increased activity in the cerebello-thalamo-cortical loop to maintain motor function at near normal levels (Figure 3) [63]. Furthermore, if baseline activity of the SMC is low in patients with late-stage PD, a greater range for increased activation during task execution may be observed, leading to a relative hyperactivation of brain regions in these patients compared to those experiencing early-stage disease.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is jmd-21075f3.jpg

Pathophysiology of the supplementary motor complex in patients with Parkinson’s disease and structural connections with the basal ganglia, thalamus and cerebellum. The solid line indicates projections, while the dotted line indicates weakened striato-thalamo-cortical connections. STN, subthalamic nucleus. SMC, supplementary motor complex; SMA, supplementary motor area; pre-SMA, presupplementary motor area.

Temporal processing

In addition to impairments in action sequences, patients with PD may also have difficulty with movement due to impairments in temporal processing. These impairments include symptoms such as difficulty estimating time intervals, maintaining a musical rhythm, and increased reaction time. The SMC has been shown to be important in the temporal processing necessary for these tasks [64,65], which are common symptoms of PD [66]. In healthy humans, fMRI studies provide evidence for SMA activation during tasks that require estimating time intervals [67], and this result is corroborated by the meta-analysis published by Radua et al. [68], suggesting that the SMA is activated during both the perception of time and during more difficult cognitive tasks, thus implicating a role for this structure in both cognitive effort and temporal processing. Consistent with this finding, Tanaka and Kirino [69] reported that musicians imagining a musical performance showed increased connectivity of the SMA with several brain regions, indicating that the SMA may be important for integrating necessary components of musical practice, including timing. Konoike et al. [70] showed that the SMA is involved specifically in the motor aspects of rhythm (i.e., tapping of the foot to a beat). Patients with SMA lesions also exhibit an increased reaction time and difficulty recalling prelearned rhythms, indicating a disruption of temporal processing networks [71]. Local field potential (LFP) recordings in monkeys have shown that the parkinsonian state disrupts beta band modulation, which is normally correlated with reaction time [72]. Similar conclusions have been drawn in humans with PD. Several neuroimaging studies have reported hypoactivation of the SMA in relation to temporal processing in patients with PD [70,73-75]. However, these results are not consistently reported; some studies instead report hyperactivation of the pre-SMA and SMA proper during temporal processing tasks. For example, Criaud et al. [76] found that the level of fMRI activation of the SMA, especially the pre-SMA, predicted reaction time for both patients with PD and healthy controls performing a simple reaction time task. In this context, the authors link the SMC to a proactive inhibitory network that is inappropriately hyperactivated in patients with PD [76]. One aspect of this inhibitory behavior is temporal attention. Eckert et al. [77] performed a study in which patients with PD presented increased activation of the pre-SMA compared with controls during temporally self-initiated movements, implicating a role for this structure in the temporal initiation of motor processes. Importantly, the motor task in this study was simple and not sequential, increasing the likelihood that the increased activity was actually due to temporal self-initiation rather than coordinating a sequential task. As one might expect, differences in activation of the SMA proper and pre-SMA have been observed in regard to temporal processing. Schwartze et al. [78] summarized that sensory, nonsequential, and suprasecond temporal processing generally activate the pre-SMA, whereas the SMA proper is generally more highly activated in sensorimotor, sequential, and subsecond temporal processing. Thus, the anatomically different sections of the SMC may be part of functionally distinct circuits that contribute to different aspects of time perception. This result is particularly important when we consider the potential role of compensatory networks activated in patients with PD due to dysfunction of the BG-thalamocortical network [79].

Importantly, some evidence suggests a different source for temporal processing. Conte et al. [80] found that continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) over the primary somatosensory cortex but not the pre-SMA affected temporal processing in healthy volunteers, and Koch et al. [81] reported improved performance on a time reproduction task in patients with PD when rTMS was applied over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex but not over the SMA. Nevertheless, the evidence generally implicates the SMA in the timing of motor processes.

Importantly, deficits in temporal processing impair not only the initiation and timing of motor processes in patients with PD but also speech and language processing. Speech and language strongly rely on processing accurate timing intervals. A recent review of nonmotor functions of the BG suggests that the pre-SMA-BG circuit is involved in the temporal processing of speech and synchronization of temporal aspects of speech with syntax in language processing [82].

Together, strong evidence indicates that the SMC is at least part of a circuit that helps the brain perceive time intervals, and the pre-SMA and SMA proper have distinct roles in this function. Furthermore, in patients with PD, dysfunction of the SMC impairs temporal processing, leading to difficulty in initiating movements and altered perception of discrete time intervals. More work is needed to properly elucidate the roles of primary SMC dysfunction and SMA hyperactivation as a compensatory mechanism in these patients.

Gait impairment

Gait impairment is another common disabling motor symptom of PD, and the SMC has been implicated in this pathology in several ways. First, functional studies suggest that hypoactivation of the SMA correlates with the slowing of volitional finger movements [83,84], suggesting that SMA dysfunction might cause slowing of gait. Additionally, gait involves a series of sequential lower extremity movements, and as previously discussed, SMC dysfunction is implicated in problems in executing sequential motor plans. Disruption of the SMA has also been shown to alter the generation of anticipatory postural adjustments prior to gait initiaton [85]. Finally, the SMA has also been implicated in freezing of gait (FOG), a common type of gait impairment in patients with PD. For instance, decreased activity in the SMA was observed in patients with PD presenting FOG compared to those without FOG during motor imagery in a gait task [86]. Although this result did not reach significance, several interventional studies targeting the SMC with rTMS have shown a clinical improvement in FOG [87,88]. Importantly, however, the current literature only implicates the dysfunction—not specifically the hypoactivation—of the SMC in gait impairment. Freezing of upper limb movement was associated with increased SMC activity, and transcranial direct current stimulation of the SMC in one study did not improve FOG [89]. Based on these results, our current understanding of the exact role of the SMC in gait is still limited. This finding is corroborated by the review by Snijders et al. [90], which highlights the importance of the dynamic interplay of different neural networks and the hyper and hypoactivation of the SMC in the disease state. Furthermore, heterogeneity in clinical subtypes of PD may lead to different activation patterns.

SMC as a target for PD treatment

Since the SMC has been implicated in many symptoms of PD, studies have targeted the SMA for the treatment of PD. Medical therapies for PD, including dopamine agonists, have been shown to alter the activity of the SMC [75,91]. Furthermore, studies have examined fMRI-guided neurofeedback as a potential treatment strategy for patients with PD and have found that this strategy increases SMA activity and improves symptoms [92-94]. However, these interventions are nonspecific to modulation of the SMC and are known to act on other regions, such as the BG. We therefore turned our attention to neuromodulation specifically targeting the SMC, which has also been shown to effectively alleviate symptoms of PD. Benefits of direct cortical stimulation in a patient with PD was first observed in 1979 by Woolsey et al. [95] Subthreshold stimulation of the precentral gyrus resulted in a transient disappearance of tremor and rigidity. More recently, the evidence has shown efficacy in alleviating tremors in patients receiving M1 stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain [96]. Noninvasive methods with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) specifically targeting the SMC have also been used, providing more definitive evidence of an antiparkinsonian effect (Table 2). However, cortical stimulation of areas including the SMA remains poorly understood [97]. Current studies involve a limited number of patients and vary in the frequency of stimulation used, the duration of treatment and number of pulses, and in the measurement of clinical improvement after stimulation. This variability may explain why evidence regarding the efficacy rTMS of the SMC has yielded mixed results. Notably, neuromodulation of other cortical areas may also be beneficial; however, the amelioration of symptoms in some of these studies (e.g., three studies investigating 1 Hz stimulation found a reduction in drug-induced dyskinesias) warrants further investigation into the role of neuromodulation of the SMC as a potential therapy. A summary of the results of cortical stimulation studies of the SMC is shown in Figure 4. Based on the functional role of the SMC and the studies discussed in this review, one might imagine several other neuromodulatory therapies to achieve clinical benefit in patients with PD. For instance, cortical epidural or subdural implants with separate pre-SMA and SMA contacts for differential stimulation could be considered, enabling finer control over distinct circuits that may serve different functions. For instance, action sequencing impairments may be caused by dysfunction in the inhibitory hyperdirect pathway [8]; neuromodulation of the SMA may then represent a treatment for this symptom. Regarding DBS, studies have utilized fMRI or PET to report changes in the cortical activity of patients undergoing STN-DBS [74,98-100]. Following STN stimulation, blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) activation is observed in the ipsilateral SMC. While SMC activity may serve as a surrogate marker for symptoms of PD related to impairments in action sequences, temporal processing and gait impairments, the temporal resolution of fMRI is limited. Measuring SMC activity with subdural electrocorticography provides the spatial and temporal resolution necessary to observe changes in cortical activity relative to symptom onset. This input can then drive DBS through a feedback mechanism. Recently, beta-gamma phase-amplitude coupling (PAC) has been identified as a promising electrophysiological biomarker of the parkinsonian motor state that has been detected in the cortical node of the BG-thalamo-cortical network [101]. The SMC and premotor areas exhibit this abnormal coupling between β and broadband-γ and can therefore serve as a biomarker of PD. Measuring abnormal PAC in the SMC is thus useful as a control signal for a “closedloop” DBS device [102]. In this case, one could use the PAC signal to tune DBS parameters and suppress this abnormal coupling phenomenon. Excitingly, these theories have begun to move toward clinical application, as a successful feasibility study for closed loop DBS in 13 patients with PD has recently been published [103].

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is jmd-21075f4.jpg

Number of SMA stimulation studies that worsened or improved PD symptoms. Negative values indicate worsening symptoms. SMA, supplementary motor area; UPDRS, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale; PD, Parkinson’s disease.

Table 2.

Noninvasive cortical stimulation of the supplementary motor area in patients with PD

StudyPatients (n)Stimulation parameters (frequency, intensity, number of pulses)Results
Boylan et al. [104]1010-Hz, 110% MT, 2,000Worsening of reaction times and handwriting
Koch et al. [81]105-Hz, 100% MT, 250No significant effect on time perception
Koch et al. [105]81-Hz, 90% RMT, 9001-Hz markedly reduced drug-induced dyskinesias, 5-Hz rTMS induced a slight but not significant increase
5-Hz, 110% RMT, 900
Brusa et al. [106]101-Hz, 90% RMT, 900Reduction in levodopa-induced dyskinesia
Hamada et al. [107]98 (55 active, 43 sham)5-Hz, 110% AMT, 1,000 (1 day)/week × 8 weeksImprovements in total and motor UPDRS
Hamada et al. [88]98 (55 active, 43 sham)5-Hz, 110% AMT, 1,000 (1 day)/week × 8 weeksA subgroup analysis of UPDRS revealed improved bradykinesia in patients with PD
Shirota et al. [108]*106 (36 active 1-Hz, 34 active 10-Hz, and 36 sham)1-Hz, 110% AMT/110% RMT, 1,000 (1 day)/week × 8 weeksImprovement of motor UPDRS in the 1-Hz group. Sham stimulation and 10-Hz rTMS transiently improved motor symptoms, but effects disappeared during the observation period.
10-Hz, 110% AMT/110% RMT, 1,000 (1 day)/week × 8 weeks
Kim et al. [87]1225-Hz, 100% RMT, 100/day × 2 daysImproved gait and fewer freezing episodes during SMA stimulation compared to motor cortex stimulation
Sayın et al. [109]17 (9 treatment, 8 sham)1-Hz, 90% RMT, 1,800/day × 10 daysDecreased levodopa-induced dyskinesia for 24 hours with no change in motor function for SMA stimulation compared with sham stimulation
Jacobs et al. [85]16 (8 with PD, 8 without PD)1-Hz, 80% RMT, 1,800/day × 1 dayDecreased duration but not amplitude of APA in both groups. The symptom severity of patients with PD was positively correlated with the extent to which their APA duration was changed
Yokoe et al. [110]1910-Hz, 100% RMT, 1,000 (1 day)/week × 12 weeksSignificant change in UPDRS-III after SMA and M1 stimulation (better with M1, although not significant). Significant amelioration of upper limb scores after stimulation over M1 and SMA and of akinesia after stimulation of M1.
Ma et al. [111]2810-Hz, 90% RMT, 1,000 (1 day)/week × 2 weeksNo change in sequence effect. Improvements in FOG, UPDRS-III, ambulation time, cadence, step count, and velocity with real stimulation.
Lee et al. [112]1010-Hz, 90% RMT, 1,000Lack of improvement with SMC stimulation, but improvement was observed after motor cortex and DLPFC stimulation.

All studies included some form of a sham control.

*randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, multicenter trial.

PD, Parkinson’s disease; rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; SMA, supplementary motor area; APA, anticipatory postural adjustment; M1, primary motor cortex; FOG, freezing of gait; SMC, supplementary motor complex; MT, motor threshold; RMT, resting motor threshold; AMT, active motor threshold; UPDRS, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale; DLPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

Conclusions

A restricted view of PD as primarily a disease of BG dysfunction ignores the effect of some cortical circuits, such as those involving the SMC, on PD symptoms. The SMC plays a role in motor sequencing, temporal processing, and gait, and the evidence presented in this review highlights that dysfunction of this cortical area is associated with impairments in each of these processes in patients with PD. Nonetheless, current evidence does not provide a clear pattern of SMC dysfunction in patients PD. Factors contributing to the differing results include differential hyper and hypoactivation of parts of the SMC in patients with PD, compensatory networks that are activated at different points during disease progression, and disparate patient populations and experimental tasks. The results of preliminary stimulation studies targeting the SMC show potential in alleviating the debilitating symptoms of PD (i.e., gait impairments); thus, future research designed to better understand SMC activity as a function of the PD phenotype and disease progression may facilitate the development of novel treatment strategies and targets.

Footnotes

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Funding Statement

None.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Shervin Rahimpour, Mark Hallett. Data curation: all authors. Formal analysis: all authors. Visualization: Shervin Rahimpour, Mark Hallett. Writing—original draft: all authors. Writing—review & editing: all authors.

REFERENCES

1. Dickson DW. Neuropathology of Parkinson disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2018;46 Suppl 1:S30–S33. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
2. Obeso JA, Rodríguez-Oroz MC, Rodríguez M, Lanciego JL, Artieda J, Gonzalo N, et al. Pathophysiology of the basal ganglia in Parkinson’s disease. Trends Neurosci. 2000;23:S8–S19. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
3. Wiecki TV, Frank MJ. Neurocomputational models of motor and cognitive deficits in Parkinson’s disease. Prog Brain Res. 2010;183:275–297. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
4. Caligiore D, Pezzulo G, Baldassarre G, Bostan AC, Strick PL, Doya K, et al. Consensus paper: towards a systems-level view of cerebellar function: the interplay between cerebellum, basal ganglia, and cortex. Cerebellum. 2017;16:203–229. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
5. Jahanshahi M, Obeso I, Rothwell JC, Obeso JA. A fronto-striato-subthalamic-pallidal network for goal-directed and habitual inhibition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015;16:719–732. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
6. McNab F, Klingberg T. Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11:103–107. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
7. Yin HH, Knowlton BJ. The role of the basal ganglia in habit formation. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7:464–476. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
8. Caligiore D, Helmich RC, Hallett M, Moustafa AA, Timmermann L, Toni I, et al. Parkinson’s disease as a system-level disorder. NPJ Parkinsons Dis. 2016;2:16025. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
9. Grafton ST. Contributions of functional imaging to understanding parkinsonian symptoms. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2004;14:715–719. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
10. Haslinger B, Erhard P, Kämpfe N, Boecker H, Rummeny E, Schwaiger M, et al. Event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging in Parkinson’s disease before and after levodopa. Brain. 2001;124:558–570. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
11. Playford ED, Jenkins IH, Passingham RE, Nutt J, Frackowiak RS, Brooks DJ. Impaired mesial frontal and putamen activation in Parkinson’s disease: a positron emission tomography study. Ann Neurol. 1992;32:151–161. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
12. MacDonald V, Halliday GM. Selective loss of pyramidal neurons in the pre-supplementary motor cortex in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2002;17:1166–1173. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
13. Wu T, Hallett M. The cerebellum in Parkinson’s disease. Brain. 2013;136:696–709. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
14. Nachev P, Kennard C, Husain M. Functional role of the supplementary and pre-supplementary motor areas. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9:856–869. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
15. Kim JH, Lee JM, Jo HJ, Kim SH, Lee JH, Kim ST, et al. Defining functional SMA and pre-SMA subregions in human MFC using resting state fMRI: functional connectivity-based parcellation method. Neuroimage. 2010;49:2375–2386. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
16. Luppino G, Matelli M, Rizzolatti G. Cortico-cortical connections of two electrophysiologically identified arm representations in the mesial agranular frontal cortex. Exp Brain Res. 1990;82:214–218. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
17. Luppino G, Matelli M, Camarda RM, Gallese V, Rizzolatti G. Multiple representations of body movements in mesial area 6 and the adjacent cingulate cortex: an intracortical microstimulation study in the macaque monkey. J Comp Neurol. 1991;311:463–482. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
18. Matsuzaka Y, Aizawa H, Tanji J. A motor area rostral to the supplementary motor area (presupplementary motor area) in the monkey: neuronal activity during a learned motor task. J Neurophysiol. 1992;68:653–662. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
19. Tanji J. The supplementary motor area in the cerebral cortex. Neurosci Res. 1994;19:251–268. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
20. Tanji J. New concepts of the supplementary motor area. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1996;6:782–787. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
21. Penfield W, Welch K. The supplementary motor area of the cerebral cortex; a clinical and experimental study. AMA Arch Neurol Psychiatry. 1951;66:289–317. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
22. Picard N, Strick PL. Motor areas of the medial wall: a review of their location and functional activation. Cereb Cortex. 1996;6:342–353. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
23. Grosbras MH, Lobel E, Van de Moortele PF, LeBihan D, Berthoz A. An anatomical landmark for the supplementary eye fields in human revealed with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Cereb Cortex. 1999;9:705–711. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
24. Akkal D, Dum RP, Strick PL. Supplementary motor area and presupplementary motor area: targets of basal ganglia and cerebellar output. J Neurosci. 2007;27:10659–10673. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
25. Behrens TE, Johansen-Berg H, Woolrich MW, Smith SM, WheelerKingshott CA, Boulby PA, et al. Non-invasive mapping of connections between human thalamus and cortex using diffusion imaging. Nat Neurosci. 2003;6:750–757. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
26. Bozkurt B, Yagmurlu K, Middlebrooks EH, Karadag A, Ovalioglu TC, Jagadeesan B, et al. Microsurgical and tractographic anatomy of the supplementary motor area complex in humans. World Neurosurg. 2016;95:99–107. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
27. Dum RP, Strick PL. Spinal cord terminations of the medial wall motor areas in macaque monkeys. J Neurosci. 1996;16:6513–6525. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
28. Dum RP, Strick PL. Frontal lobe inputs to the digit representations of the motor areas on the lateral surface of the hemisphere. J Neurosci. 2005;25:1375–1386. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
29. Maier MA, Armand J, Kirkwood PA, Yang HW, Davis JN, Lemon RN. Differences in the corticospinal projection from primary motor cortex and supplementary motor area to macaque upper limb motoneurons: an anatomical and electrophysiological study. Cereb Cortex. 2002;12:281–296. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
30. Muakkassa KF, Strick PL. Frontal lobe inputs to primate motor cortex: evidence for four somatotopically organized ‘premotor’ areas. Brain Res. 1979;177:176–182. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
31. Dum RP, Strick PL. The origin of corticospinal projections from the premotor areas in the frontal lobe. J Neurosci. 1991;11:667–689. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
32. Luppino G, Matelli M, Camarda R, Rizzolatti G. Corticocortical connections of area F3 (SMA-proper) and area F6 (pre-SMA) in the macaque monkey. J Comp Neurol. 1993;338:114–140. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
33. Luppino G, Matelli M, Camarda R, Rizzolatti G. Corticospinal projections from mesial frontal and cingulate areas in the monkey. Neuroreport. 1994;5:2545–2548. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
34. Wang Y, Isoda M, Matsuzaka Y, Shima K, Tanji J. Prefrontal cortical cells projecting to the supplementary eye field and presupplementary motor area in the monkey. Neurosci Res. 2005;53:1–7. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
35. Lehéricy S, Ducros M, Krainik A, Francois C, Van de Moortele PF, Ugurbil K, et al. 3-D diffusion tensor axonal tracking shows distinct SMA and pre-SMA projections to the human striatum. Cereb Cortex. 2004;14:1302–1309. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
36. Zhang S, Ide JS, Li CS. Resting-state functional connectivity of the medial superior frontal cortex. Cereb Cortex. 2012;22:99–111. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
37. Küper M, Dimitrova A, Thürling M, Maderwald S, Roths J, Elles HG, et al. Evidence for a motor and a non-motor domain in the human dentate nucleus--an fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2011;54:2612–2622. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
38. Nambu A, Tokuno H, Takada M. Functional significance of the corticosubthalamo-pallidal ‘hyperdirect’ pathway. Neurosci Res. 2002;43:111–117. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
39. Frank MJ, Samanta J, Moustafa AA, Sherman SJ. Hold your horses: impulsivity, deep brain stimulation, and medication in parkinsonism. Science. 2007;318:1309–1312. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
40. Siciliano M, De Micco R, Giordano A, Di Nardo F, Russo A, Caiazzo G, et al. Supplementary motor area functional connectivity in “drug-naïve” Parkinson’s disease patients with fatigue. J Neural Transm (Vienna) 2020;127:1133–1142. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
41. Bologna M, Paparella G, Fasano A, Hallett M, Berardelli A. Evolving concepts on bradykinesia. Brain. 2020;143:727–750. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
42. Tanji J, Shima K. Role for supplementary motor area cells in planning several movements ahead. Nature. 1994;371:413–416. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
43. Shima K, Tanji J. Neuronal activity in the supplementary and presupplementary motor areas for temporal organization of multiple movements. J Neurophysiol. 2000;84:2148–2160. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
44. Shima K, Tanji J. Both supplementary and presupplementary motor areas are crucial for the temporal organization of multiple movements. J Neurophysiol. 1998;80:3247–3260. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
45. Isoda M, Tanji J. Participation of the primate presupplementary motor area in sequencing multiple saccades. J Neurophysiol. 2004;92:653–659. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
46. Strick PL, Dum RP, Fiez JA. Cerebellum and nonmotor function. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2009;32:413–434. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
47. Caligiore D, Pezzulo G, Miall RC, Baldassarre G. The contribution of brain sub-cortical loops in the expression and acquisition of action understanding abilities. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013;37:2504–2515. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
48. Roland PE, Larsen B, Lassen NA, Skinhøj E. Supplementary motor area and other cortical areas in organization of voluntary movements in man. J Neurophysiol. 1980;43:118–136. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
49. Catalan MJ, Honda M, Weeks RA, Cohen LG, Hallett M. The functional neuroanatomy of simple and complex sequential finger movements: a PET study. Brain. 1998;121:253–264. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
50. Shibasaki H, Sadato N, Lyshkow H, Yonekura Y, Honda M, Nagamine T, et al. Both primary motor cortex and supplementary motor area play an important role in complex finger movement. Brain. 1993;116:1387–1398. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
51. Rao SM, Binder JR, Bandettini PA, Hammeke TA, Yetkin FZ, Jesmanowicz A, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging of complex human movements. Neurology. 1993;43:2311–2318. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
52. Toyokura M, Muro I, Komiya T, Obara M. Activation of pre-supplementary motor area (SMA) and SMA proper during unimanual and bimanual complex sequences: an analysis using functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neuroimaging. 2002;12:172–178. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
53. Gerloff C, Corwell B, Chen R, Hallett M, Cohen LG. Stimulation over the human supplementary motor area interferes with the organization of future elements in complex motor sequences. Brain. 1997;120:1587–1602. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
54. Dick JP, Benecke R, Rothwell JC, Day BL, Marsden CD. Simple and complex movements in a patient with infarction of the right supplementary motor area. Mov Disord. 1986;1:255–266. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
55. Thobois S, Dominey PF, Decety J, Pollak PP, Gregoire MC, Le Bars PD, et al. Motor imagery in normal subjects and in asymmetrical Parkinson’s disease: a PET study. Neurology. 2000;55:996–1002. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
56. Dominey P, Decety J, Broussolle E, Chazot G, Jeannerod M. Motor imagery of a lateralized sequential task is asymmetrically slowed in hemiParkinson’s patients. Neuropsychologia. 1995;33:727–741. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
57. Sabatini U, Boulanouar K, Fabre N, Martin F, Carel C, Colonnese C, et al. Cortical motor reorganization in akinetic patients with Parkinson’s disease: a functional MRI study. Brain. 2000;123:394–403. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
58. Mallol R, Barrós-Loscertales A, López M, Belloch V, Parcet MA, Avila C. Compensatory cortical mechanisms in Parkinson’s disease evidenced with fMRI during the performance of pre-learned sequential movements. Brain Res. 2007;1147:265–271. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
59. Caproni S, Muti M, Principi M, Ottaviano P, Frondizi D, Capocchi G, et al. Complexity of motor sequences and cortical reorganization in Parkinson’s disease: a functional MRI study. PLoS One. 2013;8:e66834. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
60. Wu T, Wang L, Chen Y, Zhao C, Li K, Chan P. Changes of functional connectivity of the motor network in the resting state in Parkinson’s disease. Neurosci Lett. 2009;460:6–10. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
61. Lee KM, Chang KH, Roh JK. Subregions within the supplementary motor area activated at different stages of movement preparation and execution. Neuroimage. 1999;9:117–123. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
62. Halsband U, Matsuzaka Y, Tanji J. Neuronal activity in the primate supplementary, pre-supplementary and premotor cortex during externally and internally instructed sequential movements. Neurosci Res. 1994;20:149–155. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
63. Wu T, Chan P, Hallett M. Effective connectivity of neural networks in automatic movements in Parkinson’s disease. Neuroimage. 2010;49:2581–2587. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
64. Macar F, Lejeune H, Bonnet M, Ferrara A, Pouthas V, Vidal F, et al. Activation of the supplementary motor area and of attentional networks during temporal processing. Exp Brain Res. 2002;142:475–485. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
65. Ferrandez AM, Hugueville L, Lehéricy S, Poline JB, Marsault C, Pouthas V. Basal ganglia and supplementary motor area subtend duration perception: an fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2003;19:1532–1544. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
66. Schwartze M, Kotz SA. Regional interplay for temporal processing in Parkinson’s disease: possibilities and challenges. Front Neurol. 2016;6:270. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
67. Macar F, Anton JL, Bonnet M, Vidal F. Timing functions of the supplementary motor area: an event-related fMRI study. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2004;21:206–215. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
68. Radua J, Del Pozo NO, Gómez J, Guillen-Grima F, Ortuño F. Meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies indicates that an increase of cognitive difficulty during executive tasks engages brain regions associated with time perception. Neuropsychologia. 2014;58:14–22. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
69. Tanaka S, Kirino E. Dynamic reconfiguration of the supplementary motor area network during imagined music performance. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:606. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
70. Konoike N, Kotozaki Y, Jeong H, Miyazaki A, Sakaki K, Shinada T, et al. Temporal and motor representation of rhythm in fronto-parietal cortical areas: an fMRI study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0130120. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
71. Halsband U, Ito N, Tanji J, Freund HJ. The role of premotor cortex and the supplementary motor area in the temporal control of movement in man. Brain. 1993;116:243–266. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
72. Hendrix CM, Campbell BA, Tittle BJ, Johnson LA, Baker KB, Johnson MD, et al. Predictive encoding of motor behavior in the supplementary motor area is disrupted in parkinsonism. J Neurophysiol. 2018;120:1247–1255. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
73. Buhmann C, Glauche V, Stürenburg HJ, Oechsner M, Weiller C, Büchel C. Pharmacologically modulated fMRI--cortical responsiveness to levodopa in drug-naive hemiparkinsonian patients. Brain. 2003;126:451–461. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
74. Ceballos-Baumann AO, Boecker H, Bartenstein P, von Falkenhayn I, Riescher H, Conrad B, et al. A positron emission tomographic study of subthalamic nucleus stimulation in Parkinson disease: enhanced movement-related activity of motor-association cortex and decreased motor cortex resting activity. Arch Neurol. 1999;56:997–1003. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
75. Jenkins IH, Fernandez W, Playford ED, Lees AJ, Frackowiak RS, Passingham RE, et al. Impaired activation of the supplementary motor area in Parkinson’s disease is reversed when akinesia is treated with apomorphine. Ann Neurol. 1992;32:749–757. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
76. Criaud M, Poisson A, Thobois S, Metereau E, Redouté J, Ibarrola D, et al. Slowness in movement initiation is associated with proactive inhibitory network dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease. J Parkinsons Dis. 2016;6:433–440. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
77. Eckert T, Peschel T, Heinze HJ, Rotte M. Increased pre-SMA activation in early PD patients during simple self-initiated hand movements. J Neurol. 2006;253:199–207. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
78. Schwartze M, Rothermich K, Kotz SA. Functional dissociation of preSMA and SMA-proper in temporal processing. Neuroimage. 2012;60:290–298. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
79. Lesiuk T, Bugos JA, Murakami B. A rationale for music training to enhance executive functions in Parkinson’s disease: an overview of the problem. Healthcare (Basel) 2018;6:35. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
80. Conte A, Rocchi L, Nardella A, Dispenza S, Scontrini A, Khan N, et al. Theta-burst stimulation-induced plasticity over primary somatosensory cortex changes somatosensory temporal discrimination in healthy humans. PLoS One. 2012;7:e32979. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
81. Koch G, Oliveri M, Brusa L, Stanzione P, Torriero S, Caltagirone C. High-frequency rTMS improves time perception in Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2004;63:2405–2406. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
82. Kotz SA, Schwartze M, Schmidt-Kassow M. Non-motor basal ganglia functions: a review and proposal for a model of sensory predictability in auditory language perception. Cortex. 2009;45:982–990. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
83. Martin JA, Zimmermann N, Scheef L, Jankowski J, Paus S, Schild HH, et al. Disentangling motor planning and motor execution in unmedicated de novo Parkinson’s disease patients: an fMRI study. Neuroimage Clin. 2019;22:101784. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
84. Brugger F, Wegener R, Walch J, Galovic M, Hägele-Link S, Bohlhalter S, et al. Altered activation and connectivity of the supplementary motor cortex at motor initiation in Parkinson’s disease patients with freezing. Clin Neurophysiol. 2020;131:2171–2180. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
85. Jacobs JV, Lou JS, Kraakevik JA, Horak FB. The supplementary motor area contributes to the timing of the anticipatory postural adjustment during step initiation in participants with and without Parkinson’s disease. Neuroscience. 2009;164:877–885. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
86. Peterson DS, Pickett KA, Duncan R, Perlmutter J, Earhart GM. Gait-related brain activity in people with Parkinson disease with freezing of gait. PLoS One. 2014;9:e90634. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
87. Kim SJ, Paeng SH, Kang SY. Stimulation in supplementary motor area versus motor cortex for freezing of gait in Parkinson’s disease. J Clin Neurol. 2018;14:320–326. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
88. Hamada M, Ugawa Y, Tsuji S, Effectiveness of rTMS on Parkinson’s Disease Study Group High-frequency rTMS over the supplementary motor area improves bradykinesia in Parkinson’s disease: subanalysis of double-blind sham-controlled study. J Neurol Sci. 2009;287:143–146. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
89. Lu C, Amundsen Huffmaster SL, Tuite PJ, MacKinnon CD. The effects of anodal tDCS over the supplementary motor area on gait initiation in Parkinson’s disease with freezing of gait: a pilot study. J Neurol. 2018;265:2023–2032. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
90. Snijders AH, Takakusaki K, Debu B, Lozano AM, Krishna V, Fasano A, et al. Physiology of freezing of gait. Ann Neurol. 2016;80:644–659. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
91. Rascol O, Sabatini U, Chollet F, Fabre N, Senard JM, Montastruc JL, et al. Normal activation of the supplementary motor area in patients with Parkinson’s disease undergoing long-term treatment with levodopa. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1994;57:567–571. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
92. Subramanian L, Hindle JV, Johnston S, Roberts MV, Husain M, Goebel R, et al. Real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback for treatment of Parkinson’s disease. J Neurosci. 2011;31:16309–16317. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
93. Mehler DMA, Williams AN, Krause F, Lührs M, Wise RG, Turner DL, et al. The BOLD response in primary motor cortex and supplementary motor area during kinesthetic motor imagery based graded fMRI neurofeedback. Neuroimage. 2019;184:36–44. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
94. Subramanian L, Morris MB, Brosnan M, Turner DL, Morris HR, Linden DE. Functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback-guided motor imagery training and motor training for Parkinson’s disease: randomized trial. Front Behav Neurosci. 2016;10:111. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
95. Woolsey CN, Erickson TC, Gilson WE. Localization in somatic sensory and motor areas of human cerebral cortex as determined by direct recording of evoked potentials and electrical stimulation. J Neurosurg. 1979;51:476–506. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
96. Meglio M, Cioni B. In: Textbook of Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery. Lozano AM, Gildenberg PL, Tasker RR, editors. Berlin: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg; 2009. pp. 1679–1690. [Google Scholar]
97. Lefaucheur JP. Treatment of Parkinson’s disease by cortical stimulation. Expert Rev Neurother. 2009;9:1755–1771. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
98. Phillips MD, Baker KB, Lowe MJ, Tkach JA, Cooper SE, Kopell BH, et al. Parkinson disease: pattern of functional MR imaging activation during deep brain stimulation of subthalamic nucleus--initial experience. Radiology. 2006;239:209–216. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
99. Arantes PR, Cardoso EF, Barreiros MA, Teixeira MJ, Gonçalves MR, Barbosa ER, et al. Performing functional magnetic resonance imaging in patients with Parkinson’s disease treated with deep brain stimulation. Mov Disord. 2006;21:1154–1162. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
100. Knight EJ, Testini P, Min HK, Gibson WS, Gorny KR, Favazza CP, et al. Motor and nonmotor circuitry activation induced by subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson disease: intraoperative functional magnetic resonance imaging for deep brain stimulation. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90:773–785. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
101. Hwang BY, Salimpour Y, Tsehay YK, Anderson WS, Mills KA. Perspective: phase amplitude coupling-based phase-dependent neuromodulation in Parkinson’s disease. Front Neurosci. 2020;14:558967. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
102. de Hemptinne C, Swann NC, Ostrem JL, Ryapolova-Webb ES, San Luciano M, Galifianakis NB, et al. Therapeutic deep brain stimulation reduces cortical phase-amplitude coupling in Parkinson’s disease. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18:779–786. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
103. Velisar A, Syrkin-Nikolau J, Blumenfeld Z, Trager MH, Afzal MF, Prabhakar V, et al. Dual threshold neural closed loop deep brain stimulation in Parkinson disease patients. Brain Stimul. 2019;12:868–876. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
104. Boylan LS, Pullman SL, Lisanby SH, Spicknall KE, Sackeim HA. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to SMA worsens complex movements in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Neurophysiol. 2001;112:259–264. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
105. Koch G, Brusa L, Caltagirone C, Peppe A, Oliveri M, Stanzione P, et al. rTMS of supplementary motor area modulates therapy-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2005;65:623–625. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
106. Brusa L, Versace V, Koch G, Iani C, Stanzione P, Bernardi G, et al. Low frequency rTMS of the SMA transiently ameliorates peak-dose LID in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Neurophysiol. 2006;117:1917–1921. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
107. Hamada M, Ugawa Y, Tsuji S, Effectiveness of rTMS on Parkinson’s Disease Study Group High-frequency rTMS over the supplementary motor area for treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2008;23:1524–1531. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
108. Shirota Y, Ohtsu H, Hamada M, Enomoto H, Ugawa Y, Research Committee on rTMS Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease Supplementary motor area stimulation for Parkinson disease: a randomized controlled study. Neurology. 2013;80:1400–1405. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
109. Sayın S, Cakmur R, Yener GG, Yaka E, Uğurel B, Uzunel F. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for dyskinesia and motor performance in Parkinson’s disease. J Clin Neurosci. 2014;21:1373–1376. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
110. Yokoe M, Mano T, Maruo T, Hosomi K, Shimokawa T, Kishima H, et al. The optimal stimulation site for high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in Parkinson’s disease: a double-blind crossover pilot study. J Clin Neurosci. 2018;47:72–78. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
111. Ma J, Gao L, Mi T, Sun J, Chan P, Wu T. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation does not improve the sequence effect in freezing of gait. Parkinsons Dis. 2019;2019:2196195. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
112. Lee SY, Kim MS, Chang WH, Cho JW, Youn JY, Kim YH. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on freezing of gait in patients with Parkinsonism. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2014;32:743–753. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Journal of Movement Disorders are provided here courtesy of Korean Movement Disorders Society

Full text links 

Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.14802/jmd.21075

Citations & impact 

Impact metrics

7
Citations
Jump to Citations

Citations of article over time

Alternative metrics

Altmetric item for https://www.altmetric.com/details/117514289
Altmetric
Discover the attention surrounding your research
https://www.altmetric.com/details/117514289

Smart citations by scite.ai
Smart citations by scite.ai include citation statements extracted from the full text of the citing article. The number of the statements may be higher than the number of citations provided by EuropePMC if one paper cites another multiple times or lower if scite has not yet processed some of the citing articles.
Explore citation contexts and check if this article has been supported or disputed.
https://scite.ai/reports/10.14802/jmd.21075

Supporting
Mentioning
Contrasting
0
6
0

Article citations

Go to all (7) article citations

Similar Articles 

To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.

Funding 

Funders who supported this work.

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (1)

Minister 203 of Science and Technology, Taiwan (1)