3.8 Article

Modulation of a brain-behavior relationship in verbal working memory by rTMS

期刊

COGNITIVE BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 241-249

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00196-9

关键词

rTMS; cognition; middle frontal gyrus; neuroimaging; human

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [R01EY12091] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [R01MH57980, R01MH60734] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated whether the brain-behavior relationship (BBR) between regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) as measured by positron emission tomography (PET) and individual accuracy in verbal working memory (WM) can be modulated by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the left or right middle frontal gyrus (MFG). Fourteen right-handed male subjects received a 30-s rTMS train (4 Hz, 110% motor threshold) to the left or right MFG during a 2-back WM task using letters as stimuli. Simultaneously an rCBF PET tracer was injected and whole-brain functional images were acquired. A hypothesis-driven region-of-interest-analysis of the left and right MFG BBR as well as an explorative whole-brain analysis correlating the individual accuracy with rCBF was carried out. Without rTMS we found a negative BBR in the left but no significant BBR in the right MFG. This negative BBR is best explained by an increased effort of volunteers with an inferior task performance. Left-sided rTMS led to a shift of the BBR towards the superior frontal gyrus (SFG) and to a positive BBR in anterior parts of the left SFG. With rTMS of the right MFG the BBR was posterior and inferior in the left inferior frontal gyrus. Beyond the cognitive subtraction approach this correlation analysis provides information on how the prefrontal cortex is involved based on individual performance in working memory. The results are discussed along the idea of a short-term plasticity in an active neuronal network that reacts to an rTMS-induced temporary disruption of two different network modules. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据