Resting Motor Threshold, MEP and TEP Variability During Daytime

Braack, Esther M. ter; Goede, Annika A. de; Putten, Michel J.A.M. van

doi:10.1007/s10548-018-0662-7

Cited by 35 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(97 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Measurements were conducted at 09.00 AM or 02.00PM and spread evenly between AM and PM. No significant differences in TMS measures were reported between these times of day [37], except a larger TMS-evoked potential 100ms after the stimulus [38]. Soft earplugs were used to reduce the coil click.…”

Section: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phase clustering in transcranial magnetic stimulation-evoked EEG responses in genetic generalized epilepsy and migraine

Bauer

Helling

Perenboom

et al. 2019

Epilepsy & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Epilepsy and migraine are paroxysmal neurological conditions associated with disturbances of cortical excitability. No useful biomarkers to monitor disease activity in these conditions are available. Phase clustering was previously described in electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to photic stimulation and may be a potential epilepsy biomarker. Objective: To investigate EEG phase clustering in response to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), compare it to photic stimulation in controls and explore its potential as a biomarker of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy or migraine with aura. Methods: People with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, migraine with aura and healthy controls underwent single-pulse TMS with concomitant EEG recording during the interictal period. We compared phase clustering after TMS with photic stimulation across the groups using permutation-based testing. Results: We included eight people with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (five off medication, three on), 10 with migraine with aura and 37 controls. TMS and photic phase clustering spectra showed significant differences between epilepsy without medication and controls. Two phase clustering-based indices successfully captured these differences between groups. One participant was tested multiple times. In this case, the phase clustering-based indices were inversely correlated with the dose of anti-epileptic medication. Phase clustering did not differ between people with migraine and controls. Conclusion: We present methods to quantify phase clustering using TMS-EEG and show its potential value as of brain network activity in epilepsy. Our results suggest that the higher propensity to phase clustering is not shared between epilepsy and migraine.

show abstract

Section: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phase clustering in transcranial magnetic stimulation-evoked EEG responses in genetic generalized epilepsy and migraine

Bauer

Helling

Perenboom

et al. 2019

Epilepsy & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in Peinemann's study, the effect of 1800 pulses of rTMS lasted less than 40 minutes . Similarly, Muellbacher et al used 1‐Hz rTMS at 115% rMT intensity for 15 minutes and found significant reduction in motor cortex excitability for more than 30 minutes . In this study, the effect on MEP lasted at least 30 minutes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…9 Similarly, Muellbacher et al used 1-Hz rTMS at 115% rMT intensity for 15 minutes and found significant reduction in motor cortex excitability for more than 30 minutes. 17 In this study, the effect on MEP lasted at least 30 minutes. The effect on rMT did not last 30 minutes, although this may have been due to an insufficient sample size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Effect of different pulse numbers of transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor cortex excitability: Single‐blind, randomized cross‐over design

Tang

Xuan

et al. 2019

CNS Neurosci Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims We aimed to investigate the effect of different pulse numbers of high‐frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the motor cortex on cortical excitability in healthy participants. Methods Fifteen healthy participants received 600 and 1200 pulses of 5‐Hz rTMS on separate days in a random order. Stimulation (duration, 2 seconds and interval, 1 seconds) was delivered over the left primary motor cortex for the hand, at 90% of resting motor threshold (rMT). The rMT and motor evoked potential (MEP) were measured before stimulation, and at 0 and 30 minutes after rTMS. Results No significant differences were observed between the two conditions for MEP (P = .919) or rMT (P = .266). Compared with baseline, MEP was increased significantly at 0 (P < .001) and 30 minutes (P < .001) after stimulation. After stimulation, rMT was decreased at 0 minute for the 600 and 1200 pulse conditions (P < .001), but had recovered by 30 minutes (P = .073). Conclusion Subthreshold 5‐Hz rTMS increased motor cortex excitability in healthy humans. However, the number of pulses may exhibit a ceiling effect in that beyond a certain point, that is, increasing the number of pulses may exhibit no further increase in cortical excitability.

show abstract

“…The TEP P30 and N100 amplitude standard deviations were significantly higher between individuals within one session than within individuals during the day. 117 Casula et al examined various characteristics of TEP induced by sp-controllable TMS over the M1. Specifically, RMT was measured as an approximation of corticospinal excitability; global mean field power (GMFP) was measured as an approximation of global cortical excitability; and local mean field power was measured as an approximation of local cortical excitability.…”

Section: Single-pulse Tms: M1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward the establishment of neurophysiological indicators for neuropsychiatric disorders using transcranial magnetic stimulation‐evoked potentials: A systematic review

Noda

2019

Psychiatry Clin Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can depolarize the neurons directly under the coil when applied to the cerebral cortex, and modulate the neural circuit associated with the stimulation site, which makes it possible to measure the neurophysiological index to evaluate excitability and inhibitory functions. Concurrent TMS and electroencephalography (TMS-EEG) has been developed to assess the neurophysiological characteristics of cortical regions other than the motor cortical region noninvasively. The aim of this review is to comprehensively discuss TMS-EEG research in the healthy brain focused on excitability, inhibition, and plasticity following neuromodulatory TMS paradigms from a neurophysiological perspective. A search was conducted in PubMed to identify articles that examined humans and that were written in English and published by September 2018. The search terms were as follows: (TMS OR 'transcranial magnetic stimulation') AND (EEG OR electroencephalog*) NOT (rTMS OR 'repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation' OR TBS OR 'theta burst stimulation') AND (healthy). The study presents an overview of TMS-EEG methodology and neurophysiological indices and reviews previous findings from TMS-EEG in healthy individuals. Furthermore, this review discusses the potential application of TMS-EEG neurophysiology in the clinical setting to study healthy and diseased brain conditions in the future. Combined TMS-EEG is a powerful tool to probe and map neural circuits in the human brain noninvasively and represents a promising approach for determining the underlying pathophysiology of neuropsychiatric disorders.

show abstract

Resting Motor Threshold, MEP and TEP Variability During Daytime

Cited by 35 publications

References 65 publications

Phase clustering in transcranial magnetic stimulation-evoked EEG responses in genetic generalized epilepsy and migraine

Phase clustering in transcranial magnetic stimulation-evoked EEG responses in genetic generalized epilepsy and migraine

Effect of different pulse numbers of transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor cortex excitability: Single‐blind, randomized cross‐over design

Toward the establishment of neurophysiological indicators for neuropsychiatric disorders using transcranial magnetic stimulation‐evoked potentials: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About