Angel V Peterchev1, Bruce Luber2, Gregory G Westin3, Sarah H Lisanby4. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: angel.peterchev@duke.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. 3. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Scalp sensation and pain comprise the most common side effect of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), which can reduce tolerability and complicate experimental blinding. OBJECTIVE: We explored whether changing the width of single TMS pulses affects the quality and tolerability of the resultant somatic sensation. METHODS: Using a controllable pulse parameter TMS device with a figure-8 coil, single monophasic magnetic pulses inducing electric field with initial phase width of 30, 60, and 120 µs were delivered in 23 healthy volunteers. Resting motor threshold of the right first dorsal interosseus was determined for each pulse width, as reported previously. Subsequently, pulses were delivered over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at each of the three pulse widths at two amplitudes (100% and 120% of the pulse-width-specific motor threshold), with 20 repetitions per condition delivered in random order. After each pulse, subjects rated 0-to-10 visual analog scales for Discomfort, Sharpness, and Strength of the sensation. RESULTS: Briefer TMS pulses with amplitude normalized to the motor threshold were perceived as slightly more uncomfortable than longer pulses (with an average 0.89 point increase on the Discomfort scale for pulse width of 30 µs compared to 120 µs). The sensation of the briefer pulses was felt to be substantially sharper (2.95 points increase for 30 µs compared to 120 µs pulse width), but not stronger than longer pulses. As expected, higher amplitude pulses increased the perceived discomfort and strength, and, to a lesser degree the perceived sharpness. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contradict a previously published hypothesis that briefer TMS pulses are more tolerable. We discovered that the opposite is true, which merits further study as a means of enhancing tolerability in the context of repetitive TMS.
BACKGROUND:Scalp sensation and pain comprise the most common side effect of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), which can reduce tolerability and complicate experimental blinding. OBJECTIVE: We explored whether changing the width of single TMS pulses affects the quality and tolerability of the resultant somatic sensation. METHODS: Using a controllable pulse parameter TMS device with a figure-8 coil, single monophasic magnetic pulses inducing electric field with initial phase width of 30, 60, and 120 µs were delivered in 23 healthy volunteers. Resting motor threshold of the right first dorsal interosseus was determined for each pulse width, as reported previously. Subsequently, pulses were delivered over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at each of the three pulse widths at two amplitudes (100% and 120% of the pulse-width-specific motor threshold), with 20 repetitions per condition delivered in random order. After each pulse, subjects rated 0-to-10 visual analog scales for Discomfort, Sharpness, and Strength of the sensation. RESULTS: Briefer TMS pulses with amplitude normalized to the motor threshold were perceived as slightly more uncomfortable than longer pulses (with an average 0.89 point increase on the Discomfort scale for pulse width of 30 µs compared to 120 µs). The sensation of the briefer pulses was felt to be substantially sharper (2.95 points increase for 30 µs compared to 120 µs pulse width), but not stronger than longer pulses. As expected, higher amplitude pulses increased the perceived discomfort and strength, and, to a lesser degree the perceived sharpness. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contradict a previously published hypothesis that briefer TMS pulses are more tolerable. We discovered that the opposite is true, which merits further study as a means of enhancing tolerability in the context of repetitive TMS.
Authors: Laura Martin; Jeffrey J Borckardt; Scott T Reeves; Heather Frohman; Will Beam; Ziad Nahas; Kevin Johnson; Jarred Younger; Alok Madan; David Patterson; Mark George Journal: Pain Med Date: 2013-05-03 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Stefan M Goetz; Bruce Luber; Sarah H Lisanby; David L K Murphy; I Cassie Kozyrkov; Warren M Grill; Angel V Peterchev Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Jeffrey J Borckardt; Arthur R Smith; Kelby Hutcheson; Kevin Johnson; Ziad Nahas; Berry Anderson; M Bret Schneider; Scott T Reeves; Mark S George Journal: J ECT Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 3.635
Authors: Jeffrey J Borckardt; Ziad H Nahas; John Teal; Sarah H Lisanby; William M McDonald; David Avery; Valerie Durkalski; Martina Pavlicova; James M Long; Harold A Sackeim; Mark S George Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Zhiyong Zeng; Lari M Koponen; Rena Hamdan; Zhongxi Li; Stefan M Goetz; Angel V Peterchev Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Simone Rossi; Andrea Antal; Sven Bestmann; Marom Bikson; Carmen Brewer; Jürgen Brockmöller; Linda L Carpenter; Massimo Cincotta; Robert Chen; Jeff D Daskalakis; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Michael D Fox; Mark S George; Donald Gilbert; Vasilios K Kimiskidis; Giacomo Koch; Risto J Ilmoniemi; Jean Pascal Lefaucheur; Letizia Leocani; Sarah H Lisanby; Carlo Miniussi; Frank Padberg; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Walter Paulus; Angel V Peterchev; Angelo Quartarone; Alexander Rotenberg; John Rothwell; Paolo M Rossini; Emiliano Santarnecchi; Mouhsin M Shafi; Hartwig R Siebner; Yoshikatzu Ugawa; Eric M Wassermann; Abraham Zangen; Ulf Ziemann; Mark Hallett Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2020-10-24 Impact factor: 4.861