Variability and Predictors of Response to Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation: A TMS-EEG Study.
Variability and Predictors of Response to Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation: A TMS-EEG Study.
复制标题
对连续theta爆发刺激的反应的变异性和预测指标：TMS-EEG研究。
DOI：
10.3389/fnins.2018.00400
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Rothwell J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rocchi L;Ibáñez J;Benussi A;Hannah R;Rawji V;Casula E;Rothwell J
连续 theta 突发刺激 (cTBS) 是一种重复经颅磁刺激范例，据报道可降低受刺激皮质区域的兴奋性，并被认为反映了一种抑制性突触可塑性。然而，自推出以来，cTBS 的效果已显示出显着的变化，这些变化通常通过测量运动诱发电位 (MEP) 的幅度来量化。实验结果不一致的部分原因可能是遗传或神经生理因素引起的 TMS 效应的内在变异性。然而，MEP 也有可能仅反映输出神经元子群的兴奋性；静息脑电图功率和结合 TMS 和脑电图 (TMS-EEG) 的测量可能更全面地反映皮质兴奋性。本研究的目的是验证 cTBS 反应的几个预测因素的稳健性，例如 I 波募集和基线 MEP 振幅，并测试 cTBS 对多种神经生理测量的后效应，例如 MEP、静息脑电图功率、局部平均场功率 (LMFP)、TMS 相关频谱扰动 (TRSP) 和试验间阶段聚类 (ITPC)。因此，我们无法确认 cTBS 后 MEP 振幅的预期下降或 I 波募集和 MEP 振幅预测 cTBS 反应的能力。静息脑电图功率、LMFP、TRSP 和 ITPC 在 cTBS 后表现出更一致的下降趋势。总体而言，我们的数据表明，cTBS 对皮质脊髓兴奋性的影响是可变的，并且难以用常见的电生理标志物来预测，而当结合 TMS 和 EEG 探测时，其影响可能会更清楚。
Continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) is a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation paradigm reported to decrease the excitability of the stimulated cortical area and which is thought to reflect a form of inhibitory synaptic plasticity. However, since its introduction, the effect of cTBS has shown a remarkable variability in its effects, which are often quantified by measuring the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). Part of this inconsistency in experimental results might be due to an intrinsic variability of TMS effects caused by genetic or neurophysiologic factors. However, it is also possible that MEP only reflect the excitability of a sub-population of output neurons; resting EEG power and measures combining TMS and electroencephalography (TMS-EEG) might represent a more thorough reflection of cortical excitability. The aim of the present study was to verify the robustness of several predictors of cTBS response, such as I wave recruitment and baseline MEP amplitude, and to test cTBS after-effects on multiple neurophysiologic measurements such as MEP, resting EEG power, local mean field power (LMFP), TMS-related spectral perturbation (TRSP), and inter-trial phase clustering (ITPC). As a result, we were not able to confirm either the expected decrease of MEP amplitude after cTBS or the ability of I wave recruitment and MEP amplitude to predict the response to cTBS. Resting EEG power, LMFP, TRSP, and ITPC showed a more consistent trend toward a decrease after cTBS. Overall, our data suggest that the effect of cTBS on corticospinal excitability is variable and difficult to predict with common electrophysiologic markers, while its effect might be clearer when probed with combined TMS and EEG.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.7
作者：
Georgiev, Dejan;Rocchi, Lorenzo;Jahanshahi, Marjan
通讯作者：
Jahanshahi, Marjan
DOI：
10.1016/j.clinph.2017.08.023
发表时间：
2017-11
期刊：
Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology
影响因子：
--
作者：
Jannati A;Block G;Oberman LM;Rotenberg A;Pascual-Leone A
通讯作者：
Pascual-Leone A
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Keil, Julian;Timm, Jana;Schoenwiesner, Marc
通讯作者：
Schoenwiesner, Marc
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Casula, Elias Paolo;Bassi, Mario Stampanoni;Koch, Giacomo
通讯作者：
Koch, Giacomo
影响因子：
5.5
作者：
Cheeran, Binith;Talelli, Penelope;Rothwell, John C.
通讯作者：
Rothwell, John C.