Literature DB >> 30300705

The Effects of Waveform and Current Direction on the Efficacy and Test-Retest Reliability of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Paula Davila-Pérez1, Ali Jannati2, Peter J Fried3, Javier Cudeiro Mazaira4, Alvaro Pascual-Leone5.   

Abstract

The pulse waveform and current direction of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) influence its interactions with the neural substrate; however, their role in the efficacy and reliability of single- and paired-pulse TMS measures is not fully understood. We investigated how pulse waveform and current direction affect the efficacy and test-retest reliability of navigated, single- and paired-pulse TMS measures. 23 healthy adults (aged 18-35 years) completed two identical TMS sessions, assessing resting motor threshold (RMT), motor-evoked potentials (MEPs), cortical silent period (cSP), short- and long-interval intra-cortical inhibition (SICI and LICI), and intracortical facilitation (ICF) using either monophasic posterior-anterior (monoPA; n = 9), monophasic anterior-posterior (monoAP; n = 7), or biphasic (biAP-PA; n = 7) pulses. Averages of each TMS measure were compared across the three groups and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to assess test-retest reliability. RMT was the lowest and cSP was the longest with biAP-PA pulses, whereas MEP latency was the shortest with monoPA pulses. SICI and LICI had the largest effect with monoPA pulses, whereas only monoAP and biAP-PA pulses resulted in significant ICF. MEP amplitude was more reliable with either monoPA or monoAP than with biAP-PA pulses. LICI was the most reliable with monoAP pulses, whereas ICF was the most reliable with biAP-PA pulses. Waveform/current direction influenced RMT, MEP latency, cSP, SICI, LICI, and ICF, as well as the reliability of MEP amplitude, LICI, and ICF. These results show the importance of considering TMS pulse parameters for optimizing the efficacy and reliability of TMS neurophysiologic measures.
Copyright © 2018 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biphasic waveform; current direction; monophasic waveform; paired-pulse; reliability; transcranial magnetic stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30300705      PMCID: PMC6291364          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2018.09.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroscience        ISSN: 0306-4522            Impact factor:   3.590


  61 in total

Review 1.  Corticospinal volleys evoked by transcranial stimulation of the brain in conscious humans.

Authors:  Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Antonio Oliviero; Fabio Pilato; Paolo Mazzone; Angelo Insola; Federico Ranieri; Pietro A Tonali
Journal:  Neurol Res       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.448

2.  Do alternate methods of analysing motor evoked potentials give comparable results?

Authors:  Michelle N McDonnell; Michael C Ridding; Timothy S Miles
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2004-06-15       Impact factor: 2.390

3.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation in different current directions activates separate cortical circuits.

Authors:  Zhen Ni; Samer Charab; Carolyn Gunraj; Aimee J Nelson; Kaviraja Udupa; I-Jin Yeh; Robert Chen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  The influence of gender, hand dominance, and upper extremity length on motor evoked potentials.

Authors:  Scott C Livingston; Howard P Goodkin; Christopher D Ingersoll
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2010-11-26       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 5.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation: a primer.

Authors:  Mark Hallett
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2007-07-19       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  Preferential activation of different I waves by transcranial magnetic stimulation with a figure-of-eight-shaped coil.

Authors:  K Sakai; Y Ugawa; Y Terao; R Hanajima; T Furubayashi; I Kanazawa
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Biophysical determinants of transcranial magnetic stimulation: effects of excitability and depth of targeted area.

Authors:  Mark G Stokes; Anthony T Barker; Martynas Dervinis; Frederick Verbruggen; Leah Maizey; Rachel C Adams; Christopher D Chambers
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Reliability of transcranial magnetic stimulation induced corticomotor excitability measurements for a hand muscle in healthy and chronic stroke subjects.

Authors:  Hao Liu; Stephanie S Y Au-Yeung
Journal:  J Neurol Sci       Date:  2014-04-13       Impact factor: 3.181

9.  Direct comparison of corticospinal volleys in human subjects to transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation.

Authors:  D Burke; R Hicks; S C Gandevia; J Stephen; I Woodforth; M Crawford
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Reproducibility of Single-Pulse, Paired-Pulse, and Intermittent Theta-Burst TMS Measures in Healthy Aging, Type-2 Diabetes, and Alzheimer's Disease.

Authors:  Peter J Fried; Ali Jannati; Paula Davila-Pérez; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 5.750

View more
  8 in total

1.  The effect of intermittent theta burst stimulation on corticomotor excitability of the biceps brachii in nonimpaired individuals.

Authors:  Neil Mittal; Blaize C Majdic; Adam P Sima; Carrie L Peterson
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2021-09-06       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Test-Retest Reliability of the Effects of Continuous Theta-Burst Stimulation.

Authors:  Ali Jannati; Peter J Fried; Gabrielle Block; Lindsay M Oberman; Alexander Rotenberg; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2019-05-17       Impact factor: 4.677

3.  Effects of sonication parameters on transcranial focused ultrasound brain stimulation in an ovine model.

Authors:  Kyungho Yoon; Wonhye Lee; Ji Eun Lee; Linda Xu; Phillip Croce; Lori Foley; Seung-Schik Yoo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Transcranial direct-current stimulation combined with attention increases cortical excitability and improves motor learning in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Tomofumi Yamaguchi; Kouhei Moriya; Shigeo Tanabe; Kunitsugu Kondo; Yohei Otaka; Satoshi Tanaka
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 4.262

Review 5.  Contribution of TMS and TMS-EEG to the Understanding of Mechanisms Underlying Physiological Brain Aging.

Authors:  Andrea Guerra; Lorenzo Rocchi; Alberto Grego; Francesca Berardi; Concetta Luisi; Florinda Ferreri
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-03-22

6.  Biomarkers Obtained by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

Authors:  Ali Jannati; Mary A Ryan; Harper L Kaye; Melissa Tsuboyama; Alexander Rotenberg
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 2.177

7.  Modulation of motor cortical excitability by continuous theta-burst stimulation in adults with autism spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Ali Jannati; Mary A Ryan; Gabrielle Block; Fae B Kayarian; Lindsay M Oberman; Alexander Rotenberg; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 4.861

8.  Behavioral Differences Across Theta Burst Stimulation Protocols. A Study on the Sense of Agency in Healthy Humans.

Authors:  Giuseppe A Zito; Yulia Worbe; Jean-Charles Lamy; Joel Kälin; Janine Bühler; Samantha Weber; René M Müri; Selma Aybek
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 4.677

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.