4.3 Article

Long-lasting TMS motor threshold elevation in mild traumatic brain injury

Journal

ACTA NEUROLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
Volume 126, Issue 3, Pages 178-182

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0404.2011.01623.x

Keywords

head injury; electromyography; neurophysiology; neurotraumatology; transcranial magnetic stimulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tallus J, Lioumis P, Hamalainen H, Kahkonen S, Tenovuo O. Long-lasting TMS motor threshold elevation in mild traumatic brain injury. ?Acta Neurol Scand: 2012: 126: 178182.(C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Objectives Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is very common, and part of the patients experience persistent symptoms. These may be caused by diffuse neuronal damage and could therefore affect cortical excitability. The motor threshold (MT), measured by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), is a measure of cortical excitability and cortico-spinal tract integrity. Materials and methods We used navigated TMS (nTMS) and electromyography to determine subjects left hemisphere MTs. Nineteen subjects with mTBI (11 with persistent symptoms and eight fully recovered) and nine healthy controls were tested. The injuries had occurred on average 5 years earlier. All participants had normal brain MRIs, that is, no signs of injury. None used centrally acting medication. Results The mean MT in controls was 43.0% (SD 2.5) of maximum stimulator output. The mTBI subjects mean MT was 53.4% (SD 9.7), being higher than the controls threshold. Subjective recovery did not correlate with MT. Conclusions The results show chronic MT elevation in a sample of subjects with symptomatic or recovered mTBI. This suggests that mTBI may be compensated, although not fully recovered, years after the injury. While the cause for MT elevation cannot be concluded from these preliminary observations, possible explanations include decreased cortical excitability and impaired subcortical conduction.

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