2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.04.046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transcranial magnetic stimulation and stroke: A computer-based human model study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
73
0
2

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
5
73
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The behavior of the current density distribution directly under the coil center was very similar to the analogous atrophy models, but far less predictable along the widened sulci borders, similar to the results seen in stroke (Wagner 2001;Wagner et al 2005) and heterogeneity studies (Wagner 2001;Miranda et al 2003). There were locations directly below the most posterior portion of the figure-of-eight coil, along the widened central sulci border, where current density magnitudes were within ±15% of the maximums found under the coil center (3.59, −0.85, 6.61, and 14.35%, respectively for the base, 95, 90, and 85% widened sulci models).…”
Section: Effects Of Widened Sulci On the Induced Stimulating Currentssupporting
confidence: 65%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The behavior of the current density distribution directly under the coil center was very similar to the analogous atrophy models, but far less predictable along the widened sulci borders, similar to the results seen in stroke (Wagner 2001;Wagner et al 2005) and heterogeneity studies (Wagner 2001;Miranda et al 2003). There were locations directly below the most posterior portion of the figure-of-eight coil, along the widened central sulci border, where current density magnitudes were within ±15% of the maximums found under the coil center (3.59, −0.85, 6.61, and 14.35%, respectively for the base, 95, 90, and 85% widened sulci models).…”
Section: Effects Of Widened Sulci On the Induced Stimulating Currentssupporting
confidence: 65%
“…For the TMS frequency spectrum and given tissue resistive values implemented in the model, the current density vector distribution is governed by the condition that the normal current density vector components must be continuous across boundaries of media with differing conductivities (Zahn 2003;Wagner et al 2005). Thus, when one goes from the highly conductive CSF to the less conductive cerebral tissue at the widened sulci borders (or from the more conductive gray matter to the less conductive white matter), a jump in the normal component of the electrical field dictating final current density direction and magnitude along sulcal borders is expected.…”
Section: Widened Sulci Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional points to keep in mind are that: (1) application of TMS or tDCS to one cortical site will probably influence distant cortical or subcortical sites through trans-synaptic effects 85,86 ; (2) in patients with brain lesions, expected models of current flow elicited by rTMS or tDCS may differ from those in healthy volunteers 87 ; and (3) both techniques may potentially influence attention, fatigue, discomfort, or mood, which underscores the importance of controlling for these factors in the design of double-blind clinical trials.…”
Section: Noninvasive Brain Stimulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The specific anatomy, the pathologic alterations and the influx of cortico-spinal fluid change the conductivity with respect to healthy tissue due to the creation of new shunting routes for the currents, which can distort the electric field produced by the stimulation (Wagner et al, 2006). Thus, we need to ensure that the desired brain regions are targeted by the stimulation (Plow et al, 2009).…”
Section: Modeling the Current Flowmentioning
confidence: 99%