This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Open AccessArticle
A Methodological Evaluation of Four Different Paired Associative Stimulation Paradigms in Healthy Controls
by
Kenan Hodzic
Kenan Hodzic 1,
Magnus Thordstein
Magnus Thordstein 2
,
Joakim Strandberg
Joakim Strandberg 3,4
,
Elisabet Jerlhag
Elisabet Jerlhag 1 and
Caroline E. Wass
Caroline E. Wass 1,5,*
1
Division of Pharmacology, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden
2
Department of Biomedicine and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden
3
Department for Clinical Neurophysiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden
4
Section for Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden
5
Department of Psychiatry for Affective Disorders, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2025, 15(5), 461; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050461 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 19 March 2025
/
Revised: 22 April 2025
/
Accepted: 24 April 2025
/
Published: 27 April 2025
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Plasticity deficits play a key role in the pathophysiology of various psychiatric and neurological disorders. Paired associative stimulation (PAS) leverages Hebbian principles to induce synaptic plasticity in the human brain. By repeatedly pairing (1) the peripheral nerve stimulation of the median nerve with (2) transcranial magnetic stimulation over the primary motor cortex (M1) at different inter-stimulus intervals (25 ms; PAS-25, or 10 ms; PAS-10), corticospinal excitability can be increased (PAS-25, mimicking long-term potentiation (LTP)) or decreased (PAS-10, mimicking long-term depression (LTD)). However, variations in the number of pairings and inter-pair intervals lack consensus. The aim of the study was to evaluate four different PAS paradigms, i.e., PAS-10 and PAS-25 with both 180 versus 225 pairings each, to establish the most reliable PAS protocols for LTP- and LTD-like cortical changes. Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, crossover study, 14 healthy participants underwent PAS-10 and PAS-25 with 180 and 225 pairings. Excitability was assessed by quantifying the EMG response amplitude of a hand muscle to a single stimulus. Results: PAS-25 with 225 pairings produced a robust enhancement of corticospinal excitability, while PAS-25 with 180 pairings was less effective. Surprisingly, PAS-10 with both 180 and 225 pairings also increased excitability. Conclusions: While all four PAS paradigms enhanced M1 excitability, PAS-25 with 225 pairings induced the strongest group-level effects and was most time-efficient. Significant individual variability of PAS responses suggests that optimizing PAS parameters, including pairing number and interstimulus intervals, may be necessary for personalized approaches.
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Hodzic, K.; Thordstein, M.; Strandberg, J.; Jerlhag, E.; Wass, C.E.
A Methodological Evaluation of Four Different Paired Associative Stimulation Paradigms in Healthy Controls. Brain Sci. 2025, 15, 461.
https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050461
AMA Style
Hodzic K, Thordstein M, Strandberg J, Jerlhag E, Wass CE.
A Methodological Evaluation of Four Different Paired Associative Stimulation Paradigms in Healthy Controls. Brain Sciences. 2025; 15(5):461.
https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050461
Chicago/Turabian Style
Hodzic, Kenan, Magnus Thordstein, Joakim Strandberg, Elisabet Jerlhag, and Caroline E. Wass.
2025. "A Methodological Evaluation of Four Different Paired Associative Stimulation Paradigms in Healthy Controls" Brain Sciences 15, no. 5: 461.
https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050461
APA Style
Hodzic, K., Thordstein, M., Strandberg, J., Jerlhag, E., & Wass, C. E.
(2025). A Methodological Evaluation of Four Different Paired Associative Stimulation Paradigms in Healthy Controls. Brain Sciences, 15(5), 461.
https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050461
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details
here.
Article Metrics
Article Access Statistics
For more information on the journal statistics, click
here.
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.