UNLABELLED: In moderate to severely impaired stroke patients, single pulse TMS, with or without background facilitation, may not be able to evoke a motor response in muscles of the upper extremity, thereby hindering potential studies of stroke patients using TMS. Paired pulse TMS has been shown to facilitate responses in distal muscles of healthy subjects. In this study, our aim was to investigate thirteen muscles of the upper extremity in moderate to severely impaired stroke patients and determine the paired pulse interstimulus interval (ISI) that was optimal for facilitation of the TMS response. METHODS: We recruited 8 moderate to severely impaired stroke patients and 5 healthy controls. A hotspot was found that could activate the greatest number of the 13 target upper extremity muscles. 16 ISIs were tested. RESULTS: In healthy controls, an ISI range of 3-50 ms in the left hemisphere and 8-40 ms in the right hemisphere was optimal for activating the contralateral arm. In the stroke patients, stimulation of the non-lesioned hemisphere at an ISI of 8-50 ms was optimal for contralateral responses, similar to the control subjects, while stimulation of the lesioned hemisphere had an optimal ISI range of 12-50 ms. Ipsilateral responses in the paretic limb were frequent and the optimal ISI range was much later than the contralateral responses in stroke or controls occurring at 25-40 ms. CONCLUSION: In stroke and control subjects, across muscles and contralateral or ipsilateral pathways, an interstimulus interval of 25-40 ms was optimal to evoke a TMS response and resulted in the greatest degree of facilitation.
UNLABELLED: In moderate to severely impaired strokepatients, single pulse TMS, with or without background facilitation, may not be able to evoke a motor response in muscles of the upper extremity, thereby hindering potential studies of strokepatients using TMS. Paired pulse TMS has been shown to facilitate responses in distal muscles of healthy subjects. In this study, our aim was to investigate thirteen muscles of the upper extremity in moderate to severely impaired strokepatients and determine the paired pulse interstimulus interval (ISI) that was optimal for facilitation of the TMS response. METHODS: We recruited 8 moderate to severely impaired strokepatients and 5 healthy controls. A hotspot was found that could activate the greatest number of the 13 target upper extremity muscles. 16 ISIs were tested. RESULTS: In healthy controls, an ISI range of 3-50 ms in the left hemisphere and 8-40 ms in the right hemisphere was optimal for activating the contralateral arm. In the strokepatients, stimulation of the non-lesioned hemisphere at an ISI of 8-50 ms was optimal for contralateral responses, similar to the control subjects, while stimulation of the lesioned hemisphere had an optimal ISI range of 12-50 ms. Ipsilateral responses in the paretic limb were frequent and the optimal ISI range was much later than the contralateral responses in stroke or controls occurring at 25-40 ms. CONCLUSION: In stroke and control subjects, across muscles and contralateral or ipsilateral pathways, an interstimulus interval of 25-40 ms was optimal to evoke a TMS response and resulted in the greatest degree of facilitation.
Authors: G Alagona; V Delvaux; P Gérard; V De Pasqua; G Pennisi; P J Delwaide; F Nicoletti; A Maertens de Noordhout Journal: Stroke Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Yuan Yang; Nirvik Sinha; Runfeng Tian; Netta Gurari; Justin M Drogos; Julius P A Dewald Journal: IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Jacob G McPherson; Albert Chen; Michael D Ellis; Jun Yao; C J Heckman; Julius P A Dewald Journal: J Physiol Date: 2018-02-19 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Michael D Ellis; Justin Drogos; Carolina Carmona; Thierry Keller; Julius P A Dewald Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Jun Yao; Justin Drogos; Fleur Veltink; Caitlyn Anderson; Janny Concha Urday Zaa; Laura Imming Hanson; Julius P A Dewald Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2015-05-11 Impact factor: 3.169