Impact of coil position and electrophysiological monitoring on determination of motor thresholds to transcranial magnetic stimulation

被引:91
作者
Conforto, AB
Z'Graggen, WJ
Kohl, AS
Rösler, KM
Kaelin-Lang, A [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bern, Inselspital, Dept Neurol, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland
[2] Univ Sao Paulo, Dept Neurol, Sao Paulo, Brazil
关键词
movement threshold; hot spot; transcranial magnetic stimulation; motor cortex; human;
D O I
10.1016/j.clinph.2003.11.010
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: We compared motor and movement thresholds to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in healthy subjects and investigated the effect of different coil positions on thresholds and MEP (motor-evoked potential) amplitudes. Methods: The abductor pollicis brevis (APB) 'hot spot' and a standard scalp position were stimulated. APB resting motor threshold (APB MEP-MT) defined by the '5/10' electrophysiological method was compared with movement threshold (MOV-MT), defined by visualization of movements. Additionally, APB MEP-MTs were evaluated with the '3/6 method,' and MEPs were recorded at a stimulation intensity of 120% APB MEP-MT at each position. Results: APB MEP-MTs were significantly lower by stimulation of the 'hot spot' than of the standard position, and significantly lower than MOV-MTs (n = 15). There were no significant differences between the '3/6' and the '5/10' methods, or between APB MEP amplitudes by stimulating each position at 120% APB MEP-MT. Conclusions: Coil position and electrophysiological monitoring influenced motor threshold determinations. Performing 6 instead of 10 trials did not produce different threshold measurements. Adjustment of intensity according to APB MEP-MT at the stimulated position did not influence APB MEP amplitudes. Significance: Standardization of stimulation positions, nomenclature and criteria for threshold measurements should be considered in design and comparison of TMS protocols. (C) 2004 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:812 / 819
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Comparison of representational maps using functional magnetic resonance imaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation [J].
Lotze, M ;
Kaethner, RJ ;
Erb, M ;
Cohen, LG ;
Grodd, W ;
Topka, H .
CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2003, 114 (02) :306-312
[22]   The transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold depends on the distance from coil to underlying cortex: A replication in healthy adults comparing two methods of assessing the distance to cortex [J].
McConnell, KA ;
Nahas, Z ;
Shastri, A ;
Lorberbaum, JP ;
Kozel, FA ;
Bohning, DE ;
George, MS .
BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2001, 49 (05) :454-459
[23]   COIL PLACEMENT IN MAGNETIC BRAIN-STIMULATION RELATED TO SKULL AND BRAIN ANATOMY [J].
MEYER, BU ;
BRITTON, TC ;
KLOTEN, H ;
STEINMETZ, H ;
BENECKE, R .
ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY AND CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1991, 81 (01) :38-46
[24]  
Mills KR, 1997, MUSCLE NERVE, V20, P570, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199705)20:5<570::AID-MUS5>3.3.CO
[25]  
2-F
[26]   Unilateral left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) produces intensity-dependent bilateral effects as measured by interleaved BOLD fMRI [J].
Nahas, Z ;
Lomarev, M ;
Roberts, DR ;
Shastri, A ;
Lorberbaum, JP ;
Teneback, C ;
McConnell, K ;
Vincent, DJ ;
Li, XB ;
George, MS ;
Bohning, DE .
BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2001, 50 (09) :712-720
[27]   I feel my hand moving: A new role of the primary motor cortex in somatic perception of limb movement [J].
Naito, E ;
Roland, PE ;
Ehrsson, HH .
NEURON, 2002, 36 (05) :979-988
[28]   THE ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS OF HANDEDNESS: THE EDINBURGH INVENTORY [J].
OLDFIELD, RC .
NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 1971, 9 (01) :97-113
[29]  
Padberg F, 2002, NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOL, V27, P638
[30]   SAFETY OF RAPID-RATE TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION IN NORMAL VOLUNTEERS [J].
PASCUALLEONE, A ;
HOUSER, CM ;
REESE, K ;
SHOTLAND, LI ;
GRAFMAN, J ;
SATO, S ;
VALLSSOLE, J ;
BRASILNETO, JP ;
WASSERMANN, EM ;
COHEN, LG ;
HALLETT, M .
ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY AND CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1993, 89 (02) :120-130