Secondary motor areas for response inhibition: an epicortical recording and stimulation study

Abstract

Abstract The areas that directly inhibit motor responses in the human brain remain not fully clarified, although the pre-supplementary motor area and lateral premotor areas have been implicated. The objective of the present study was to delineate the critical areas for response inhibition and the associated functional organization of the executive action control system in the frontal lobe. The subjects were eight intractable focal epilepsy patients with chronic subdural or depth electrode implantation for presurgical evaluation covering the frontal lobe (five for left hemisphere, three for right). We recorded event-related potentials to a Go/No-Go task. We then applied a brief 50 Hz electrical stimulation to investigate the effect of the intervention on the task. Brief stimulation was given to the cortical areas generating discrete event-related potentials specific for the No-Go trials (1–3 stimulation sites/patient, a total of 12 stimulation sites). We compared the locations of event-related potentials with the results of electrical cortical stimulation for clinical mapping. We also compared the behavioural changes induced by another brief stimulation with electrical cortical stimulation mapping. As the results, anatomically, No-Go-specific event-related potentials with relatively high amplitude, named ‘large No-Go event-related potentials’, were observed predominantly in the secondary motor areas, made up of the supplementary motor area proper, the pre-supplementary motor area, and the lateral premotor areas. Functionally, large No-Go event-related potentials in the frontal lobe were located at or around the negative motor areas or language-related areas. Brief stimulation prolonged Go reaction time at most stimulation sites (66.7%) [P < 0.0001, effect size (d) = 0.30, Wilcoxon rank sum test], and increased No-Go error at some stimulation sites (25.0%: left posterior middle frontal gyrus and left pre-supplementary motor area). The stimulation sites we adopted for brief stimulation were most frequently labelled ‘negative motor area’ (63.6%), followed by ‘language-related area’ (18.2%) by the electrical cortical stimulation mapping. The stimulation sites where the brief stimulation increased No-Go errors tended to be labelled ‘language-related area’ more frequently than ‘negative motor area’ [P = 0.0833, Fisher’s exact test (two-sided)] and were located more anteriorly than were those without a No-Go error increase. By integrating the methods of different modality, namely, event-related potentials combined with brief stimulation and clinical electrical cortical stimulation mapping, we conducted a novel neuroscientific approach, providing direct evidence that secondary motor areas, especially the pre-supplementary motor area and posterior middle frontal gyrus, play an important role in response inhibition.