4.6 Article

The variability of intracortical inhibition and facilitation

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 114, 期 12, 页码 2362-2369

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00243-8

关键词

transcranial magnetic stimulation; paired pulse technique; variability; active motor threshold; inhibition threshold; facilitation threshold

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To assess the variability of transcranial magnetic stimulation paired pulse measurements of cortical excitability between subjects, between sessions and within subjects within sessions. Methods: In experiment 1, intracortical inhibition and facilitation were assessed with a fixed conditioning stimulus intensity (CSI) of 80% of active motor threshold (AMT) whereas in experiment 2, the effect of different CSIs (60-110% of AMT) was investigated. Results: Experiment 1 revealed that subjects differed significantly in the degree of inhibition and facilitation. Between sessions the variability was substantial as predicted by high within session variability. Experiment 2 allowed determination of individual thresholds for inhibition and facilitation. These thresholds were the best predictor of the amount of inhibition or facilitation at a given CSI. Across subjects we observed a high correlation of the threshold for inhibition (expressed in terms of maximum stimulator output) with AMT (r = 0.93). Results for facilitation were more variable. Conclusions: The variability was high if a single CSI was used to compare the percent intracortical inhibition or facilitation between subjects, or between sessions. Much less variable was the threshold for intracortical inhibition/facilitation, which was highly correlated to AMT. We suggest that the ratio of CSI:AMT is a robust and useful additional measure of the integrity of neuronal circuits underlying intracortical inhibition/facilitation. (C) 2003 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.6
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