Literature DB >> 30117122

Both 50 and 30 Hz continuous theta burst transcranial magnetic stimulation depresses the cerebellum.

Nicholas D J Strzalkowski1, Aaron D Chau1, Liu Shi Gan1, Zelma H T Kiss2.   

Abstract

The cerebellum is implicated in the pathophysiology of numerous movement disorders, which makes it an attractive target for noninvasive neurostimulation. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) can induce long lasting plastic changes in human brain; however, the efficacy of different simulation protocols has not been investigated at the cerebellum. Here, we compare a traditional 50-Hz and a modified 30-Hz cTBS protocols at modulating cerebellar activity in healthy subjects. Seventeen healthy adults participated in two testing sessions where they received either 50-Hz (cTBS50) or 30-Hz (cTBS30) cerebellar cTBS. Cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI), a measure of cerebello-thalamocortical pathway strength, and motor evoked potentials (MEP) were measured in the dominant first dorsal interosseous muscle before and after (up to ~ 40 min) cerebellar cTBS. Both cTBS protocols induced cerebellar depression, indicated by significant reductions in CBI (P < 0.001). No differences were found between protocols (cTBS50 and cTBS30) at any time point (P = 0.983). MEP amplitudes were not significantly different following either cTBS protocol (P = 0.130). The findings show cerebellar excitability to be equally depressed by 50-Hz and 30-Hz cTBS in heathy adults and support future work to explore the efficacy of different cerebellar cTBS protocols in movement disorder patients where cerebellar depression could provide therapeutic benefits.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cerebellum; TMS; Theta burst stimulation; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; cTBS

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30117122     DOI: 10.1007/s12311-018-0971-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cerebellum        ISSN: 1473-4222            Impact factor:   3.847


  37 in total

1.  The role of interneuron networks in driving human motor cortical plasticity.

Authors:  Masashi Hamada; Nagako Murase; Alkomiet Hasan; Michelle Balaratnam; John C Rothwell
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 5.357

2.  Thalamic deep brain stimulation activates the cerebellothalamocortical pathway.

Authors:  G F Molnar; A Sailer; C A Gunraj; A E Lang; A M Lozano; R Chen
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2004-09-14       Impact factor: 9.910

3.  A comparison of two different continuous theta burst stimulation paradigms applied to the human primary motor cortex.

Authors:  Mitchell R Goldsworthy; Julia B Pitcher; Michael C Ridding
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 3.708

4.  The Impact of Stimulation Intensity and Coil Type on Reliability and Tolerability of Cerebellar Brain Inhibition (CBI) via Dual-Coil TMS.

Authors:  Lara Fernandez; Brendan P Major; Wei-Peng Teo; Linda K Byrne; Peter G Enticott
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.847

5.  Increased facilitation of the primary motor cortex following 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the contralateral cerebellum in normal humans.

Authors:  Massimiliano Oliveri; Giacomo Koch; Sara Torriero; Carlo Caltagirone
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2004-12-21       Impact factor: 3.046

6.  Assessing cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI) via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS): A systematic review.

Authors:  Lara Fernandez; Brendan P Major; Wei-Peng Teo; Linda K Byrne; Peter G Enticott
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 8.989

Review 7.  Efficacy and Time Course of Theta Burst Stimulation in Healthy Humans.

Authors:  Miles Wischnewski; Dennis J L G Schutter
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2015-03-26       Impact factor: 8.955

8.  Long-lasting inhibition of cerebellar output.

Authors:  T Popa; M Russo; S Meunier
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2009-10-31       Impact factor: 8.955

Review 9.  Understanding and modulating motor learning with cerebellar stimulation.

Authors:  Pablo Celnik
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.847

Review 10.  Cerebellar networks with the cerebral cortex and basal ganglia.

Authors:  Andreea C Bostan; Richard P Dum; Peter L Strick
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 20.229

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for lower extremity motor function in patients with stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yun-Juan Xie; Yi Chen; Hui-Xin Tan; Qi-Fan Guo; Benson Wui-Man Lau; Qiang Gao
Journal:  Neural Regen Res       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 5.135

Review 2.  Consensus Paper: Experimental Neurostimulation of the Cerebellum.

Authors:  Lauren N Miterko; Kenneth B Baker; Jaclyn Beckinghausen; Lynley V Bradnam; Michelle Y Cheng; Jessica Cooperrider; Mahlon R DeLong; Simona V Gornati; Mark Hallett; Detlef H Heck; Freek E Hoebeek; Abbas Z Kouzani; Sheng-Han Kuo; Elan D Louis; Andre Machado; Mario Manto; Alana B McCambridge; Michael A Nitsche; Nordeyn Oulad Ben Taib; Traian Popa; Masaki Tanaka; Dagmar Timmann; Gary K Steinberg; Eric H Wang; Thomas Wichmann; Tao Xie; Roy V Sillitoe
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.847

3.  Cerebellar rTMS and PAS effectively induce cerebellar plasticity.

Authors:  Martje G Pauly; Annika Steinmeier; Christina Bolte; Feline Hamami; Elinor Tzvi; Alexander Münchau; Tobias Bäumer; Anne Weissbach
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Consolidation of motor sequence learning eliminates susceptibility of SMAproper to TMS: a combined rTMS and cTBS study.

Authors:  Willem B Verwey; Benedikt Glinski; Min-Fang Kuo; Mohammad Ali Salehinejad; Michael A Nitsche
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 1.972

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.