4.3 Article

The TMS Map Scales with Increased Stimulation Intensity and Muscle Activation

Journal

BRAIN TOPOGRAPHY
Volume 29, Issue 1, Pages 56-66

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10548-015-0447-1

Keywords

Mapping; Stimulation intensity; Muscle activation; TMS; Corticospinal excitability

Funding

  1. Magstim Ltd
  2. National Institute for Health research (NIHR) Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/J017248/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. Lundbeck Foundation [R32-2008-2858] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. Medical Research Council [MR/K00414X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. BBSRC [BB/J017248/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. MRC [MR/K00414X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One way to study cortical organisation, or its reorganisation, is to use transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to construct a map of corticospinal excitability. TMS maps are reported to be acquired with a wide variety of stimulation intensities and levels of muscle activation. Whilst MEPs are known to increase both with stimulation intensity and muscle activation, it remains to be established what the effect of these factors is on the map's centre of gravity (COG), area, volume and shape. Therefore, the objective of this study was to systematically examine the effect of stimulation intensity and muscle activation on these four key map outcome measures. In a first experiment, maps were acquired with a stimulation intensity of 110, 120 and 130 % of resting threshold. In a second experiment, maps were acquired at rest and at 5, 10, 20 and 40 % of maximum voluntary contraction. Map area and map volume increased with both stimulation intensity (P < 0.01) and muscle activation (P < 0.01). Neither the COG nor the map shape changed with either stimulation intensity or muscle activation (P > 0.09 in all cases). This result indicates the map simply scales with stimulation intensity and muscle activation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available