Literature DB >> 18976714

Comparison of navigated and non-navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor cortex mapping, motor threshold and motor evoked potentials.

Petro Julkunen1, Laura Säisänen, Nils Danner, Eini Niskanen, Taina Hukkanen, Esa Mervaala, Mervi Könönen.   

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be used for non-invasive assessment of cortical physiology and descending motor pathways. However, the focus/exact site of cortical activation is considerably widespread in traditional TMS. When combined with MRI-based navigation, it allows specific anatomical areas of the cortex to be stimulated. The peripheral muscle responses to TMS are commonly measured as motor evoked potentials (MEPs). We compared the accuracy of cortical mapping, as well as the congruity of the motor thresholds (MT) and MEPs between navigated and non-navigated TMS procedures. Eight volunteers were studied in two sessions. In each session both hemispheres were stimulated with and without navigation. Non-navigated TMS: Both hemispheres were mapped without navigation to find the representation area of the thenar muscles based on induced MEP amplitudes. MT was then determined at the optimum coil location. Navigated TMS: Individual MR-images were used for the on-line navigation procedure. The cortical representation area of the thenar musculature was mapped at the "hand knob". The optimum stimulus target was used for MT determination. The order of these two procedures was randomized. Following the MT determination, MEPs were recorded from 20 consecutive stimuli. The MTs were similar from session-to-session with no inter-hemispheric differences, and with and without navigation. The stimulus location was more spatially discrete in navigated TMS producing more stable MEPs with significantly higher amplitudes and shorter latencies. In summary, MEPs exhibit significant differences depending on whether navigation is used. However, the MTs are not significantly dependent on the discrete stimulation site.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18976714     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.09.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  65 in total

Review 1.  Assessment and modulation of neural plasticity in rehabilitation with transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Shahid Bashir; Ilan Mizrahi; Kayleen Weaver; Felipe Fregni; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.298

2.  Corticospinal output and cortical excitation-inhibition balance in distal hand muscle representations in nonprimary motor area.

Authors:  Selja Vaalto; Laura Säisänen; Mervi Könönen; Petro Julkunen; Taina Hukkanen; Sara Määttä; Jari Karhu
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-09-30       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  High-frequency focal repetitive cerebellar stimulation induces prolonged increases in human pharyngeal motor cortex excitability.

Authors:  Dipesh H Vasant; Emilia Michou; Satish Mistry; John C Rothwell; Shaheen Hamdy
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  Group-level variations in motor representation areas of thenar and anterior tibial muscles: Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study.

Authors:  Eini Niskanen; Petro Julkunen; Laura Säisänen; Ritva Vanninen; Pasi Karjalainen; Mervi Könönen
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  A low-cost system for coil tracking during transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Edward P Washabaugh; Chandramouli Krishnan
Journal:  Restor Neurol Neurosci       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.406

6.  Nonphysiological factors in navigated TMS studies; confounding covariates and valid intracortical estimates.

Authors:  Sein Schmidt; Rouven Bathe-Peters; Robert Fleischmann; Maria Rönnefarth; Michael Scholz; Stephan A Brandt
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Neuronavigation-guided Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Aphasia.

Authors:  Woo-Jin Kim; Soo Jung Hahn; Won-Seok Kim; Nam-Jong Paik
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 1.355

8.  Aftereffects of Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation in Adjacent, Non-Target Muscles.

Authors:  Timothy P Morris; Paula Davila-Pérez; Ali Jannati; Arianna Menardi; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Peter J Fried
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2019-08-31       Impact factor: 3.590

Review 9.  The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation to evaluate cortical excitability of lower limb musculature: Challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Trisha M Kesar; James W Stinear; Steven L Wolf
Journal:  Restor Neurol Neurosci       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 2.406

10.  Language mapping with navigated repetitive TMS: proof of technique and validation.

Authors:  Phiroz E Tarapore; Anne M Findlay; Susanne M Honma; Danielle Mizuiri; John F Houde; Mitchel S Berger; Srikantan S Nagarajan
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-05-20       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.