Literature DB >> 15678481

Difference in somatosensory evoked fields elicited by mechanical and electrical stimulations: Elucidation of the human homunculus by a noninvasive method.

Ken Inoue1, Takushi Shirai, Kazuyoshi Nakanishi, Akira Hashizume, Toshihide Harada, Yasuyo Mimori, Masayasu Matsumoto.   

Abstract

We recently recorded somatosensory evoked fields (SEFs) elicited by compressing the glabrous skin of the finger and decompressing it by using a photosensor trigger. In that study, the equivalent current dipoles (ECDs) for these evoked fields appeared to be physiologically similar to the ECDs of P30m in median nerve stimulation. We sought to determine the relations of evoked fields elicited by mechanically stimulating the glabrous skin of the great toe and those of electrically produced P40m. We studied SEFs elicited by mechanical and electrical stimulations from the median and tibial nerves. The orientations of dipoles from the mechanical stimulations were from anterior-to-posterior, similar to the orientations of dipoles for P30m. The direction of the dipole around the peak of N20m from median nerve electrical stimulation was opposite to these directions. The orientations of dipoles around the peak of P40m by tibial nerve stimulation were transverse, whereas those by the compression and decompression stimulation of the toe were directed from anterior-to-posterior. The concordance of the orientations in ECDs for evoked fields elicited by mechanical and electrical stimulations suggests that the ECDs of P40m are physiologically similar to those of P30m but not to those of N20m. The discrepancy in orientations in ECDs for evoked field elicited by these stimulations in the lower extremity suggests that electrical and compression stimulations elicit evoked fields responding to fast surface rubbing stimuli and/or stimuli to the muscle and joint. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15678481      PMCID: PMC6871671          DOI: 10.1002/hbm.20089

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp        ISSN: 1065-9471            Impact factor:   5.038


  31 in total

1.  Time-varying activation of different cytoarchitectonic areas of the human SI cortex after tibial nerve stimulation.

Authors:  R Hari; T Nagamine; N Nishitani; N Mikuni; T Sato; A Tarkiainen; H Shibasaki
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Relationships between sensory responsiveness and premovement activity of quickly adapting neurons in areas 3b and 1 of monkey primary somatosensory cortex.

Authors:  R J Nelson; B N Smith; V D Douglas
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Comparison of BOLD fMRI and MEG characteristics to vibrotactile stimulation.

Authors:  Pasi I Tuunanen; Martin Kavec; Veikko Jousmäki; Jussi-Pekka Usenius; Riitta Hari; Riitta Salmelin; Risto A Kauppinen
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Topography of somatosensory evoked magnetic fields following posterior tibial nerve stimulation.

Authors:  R Kakigi; S Koyama; M Hoshiyama; M Shimojo; Y Kitamura; S Watanabe
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1995-08

5.  Differentiation of receptive fields in the sensory cortex following stimulation of various nerves of the lower limb in humans: a magnetoencephalographic study.

Authors:  M Shimojo; R Kakigi; M Hoshiyama; S Koyama; Y Kitamura; S Watanabe
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 5.115

6.  The auditory evoked "off" response: sources and comparison with the "on" and the "sustained" responses.

Authors:  C Pantev; C Eulitz; S Hampson; B Ross; L E Roberts
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Topographic analyses of somatosensory evoked potentials following stimulation of tibial, sural and lateral femoral cutaneous nerves.

Authors:  T Yamada; M Matsubara; G Shiraishi; M Yeh; M Kawasaki
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1996-01

8.  Centrifugal and centripetal mechanisms involved in the 'gating' of cortical SEPs during movement.

Authors:  S J Jones; J P Halonen; F Shawkat
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1989 Jan-Feb

9.  Cerebral magnetic responses to stimulation of tibial and sural nerves.

Authors:  J Huttunen; E Kaukoranta; R Hari
Journal:  J Neurol Sci       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 3.181

10.  Somatotopic organization of the human somatosensory cortex revealed by neuromagnetic measurements.

Authors:  Y C Okada; R Tanenbaum; S J Williamson; L Kaufman
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  2 in total

1.  Somatosensory mechanical response and digit somatotopy within cortical areas of the postcentral gyrus in humans: an MEG study.

Authors:  Ken Inoue; Kazuyoshi Nakanishi; Hikmat Hadoush; Hiroshi Kurumadani; Akira Hashizume; Toru Sunagawa; Mitsuo Ochi
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Induced and Evoked Properties of Vibrotactile Adaptation in the Primary Somatosensory Cortex.

Authors:  Nicolaas A J Puts; Richard A E Edden; Suresh Muthukumaraswamy; Krish D Singh; David J McGonigle
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 3.599

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.