期刊
CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 125, 期 1, 页码 142-147出版社
ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2013.06.187
关键词
Transcranial magnetic stimulation; TMS; Motor threshold; Electromyography; EMG; Safety
资金
- National Institute of Aging [NIA K01AG031912]
- Magstim
- MagVenture
- Neuronetics
- Cyberonics
- ANS/St. Jude
- NATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCING TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES [TL1TR000133, UL1TR000002] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
- NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [K01AG031912] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
Objective: While the standard has been to define motor threshold (MT) using EMG to measure motor cortex response to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), another method of determining MT using visual observation of muscle twitch (OM-MT) has emerged in clinical and research use. We compared these two methods for determining MT. Methods: Left motor cortex MTs were found in 20 healthy subjects. Employing the commonly-used relative frequency procedure and beginning from a clearly suprathreshold intensity, two raters used motor evoked potentials and finger movements respectively to determine EMG-MT and OM-MT. Results: OM-MT was 11.3% higher than EMG-MT (p < 0.001), ranging from 0% to 27.8%. In eight subjects, OM-MT was more than 10% higher than EMG-MT, with two greater than 25%. Conclusions: These findings suggest using OM yields significantly higher MTs than EMG, and may lead to unsafe TMS in some individuals. In more than half of the subjects in the present study, use of their OM-MT for typical rTMS treatment of depression would have resulted in stimulation beyond safety limits. Significance: For applications that involve stimulation near established safety limits and in the presence of factors that could elevate risk such as concomitant medications, EMG-MT is advisable, given that safety guidelines for TMS parameters were based on EMG-MT. (C) 2013 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。
推荐
暂无数据