Evoked EEG Responses to TMS Targeting Regions Outside the Primary Motor Cortex and Their Test-Retest Reliability.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Brain Topography Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-23 DOI:10.1007/s10548-023-01018-y
Yufei Song, Pedro C Gordon, Johanna Metsomaa, Maryam Rostami, Paolo Belardinelli, Ulf Ziemann
{"title":"Evoked EEG Responses to TMS Targeting Regions Outside the Primary Motor Cortex and Their Test-Retest Reliability.","authors":"Yufei Song, Pedro C Gordon, Johanna Metsomaa, Maryam Rostami, Paolo Belardinelli, Ulf Ziemann","doi":"10.1007/s10548-023-01018-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked electroencephalography (EEG) potentials (TEPs) provide unique insights into cortical excitability and connectivity. However, confounding EEG signals from auditory and somatosensory co-stimulation complicate TEP interpretation. Our optimized sham procedure established with TMS of primary motor cortex (Gordon in JAMA 245:118708, 2021) differentiates direct cortical EEG responses to TMS from those caused by peripheral sensory inputs. Using this approach, this study aimed to investigate TEPs and their test-retest reliability when targeting regions outside the primary motor cortex, specifically the left angular gyrus, supplementary motor area, and medial prefrontal cortex. We conducted three identical TMS-EEG sessions one week apart involving 24 healthy participants. In each session, we targeted the three areas separately using a figure-of-eight TMS coil for active TMS, while a second coil away from the head produced auditory input for sham TMS. Masking noise and electric scalp stimulation were applied in both conditions to achieve matched EEG responses to peripheral sensory inputs. High test-retest reliability was observed in both conditions. However, reliability declined for the 'cleaned' TEPs, resulting from the subtraction of evoked EEG response to the sham TMS from those to the active, particularly for latencies > 100 ms following the TMS pulse. Significant EEG differences were found between active and sham TMS at latencies < 90 ms for all targeted areas, exhibiting distinct spatiotemporal characteristics specific to each target. In conclusion, our optimized sham procedure effectively reveals EEG responses to direct cortical activation by TMS in brain areas outside primary motor cortex. Moreover, we demonstrate the impact of peripheral sensory inputs on test-retest reliability of TMS-EEG responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":55329,"journal":{"name":"Brain Topography","volume":" ","pages":"19-36"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10771591/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Topography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-023-01018-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked electroencephalography (EEG) potentials (TEPs) provide unique insights into cortical excitability and connectivity. However, confounding EEG signals from auditory and somatosensory co-stimulation complicate TEP interpretation. Our optimized sham procedure established with TMS of primary motor cortex (Gordon in JAMA 245:118708, 2021) differentiates direct cortical EEG responses to TMS from those caused by peripheral sensory inputs. Using this approach, this study aimed to investigate TEPs and their test-retest reliability when targeting regions outside the primary motor cortex, specifically the left angular gyrus, supplementary motor area, and medial prefrontal cortex. We conducted three identical TMS-EEG sessions one week apart involving 24 healthy participants. In each session, we targeted the three areas separately using a figure-of-eight TMS coil for active TMS, while a second coil away from the head produced auditory input for sham TMS. Masking noise and electric scalp stimulation were applied in both conditions to achieve matched EEG responses to peripheral sensory inputs. High test-retest reliability was observed in both conditions. However, reliability declined for the 'cleaned' TEPs, resulting from the subtraction of evoked EEG response to the sham TMS from those to the active, particularly for latencies > 100 ms following the TMS pulse. Significant EEG differences were found between active and sham TMS at latencies < 90 ms for all targeted areas, exhibiting distinct spatiotemporal characteristics specific to each target. In conclusion, our optimized sham procedure effectively reveals EEG responses to direct cortical activation by TMS in brain areas outside primary motor cortex. Moreover, we demonstrate the impact of peripheral sensory inputs on test-retest reliability of TMS-EEG responses.

Abstract Image

经颅磁刺激对初级运动皮层外靶区的诱发脑电图反应及其重测信度。
经颅磁刺激(TMS)诱发脑电图(EEG)电位(TEPs)提供了对皮质兴奋性和连通性的独特见解。然而,来自听觉和体感共刺激的混淆脑电图信号使TEP的解释复杂化。我们利用初级运动皮层经颅磁刺激(Gordon in JAMA 245: 118708,2021)建立了优化的假手术,将经颅磁刺激引起的直接皮层脑电图反应与由外周感觉输入引起的脑电图反应区分开来。使用这种方法,本研究旨在研究TEPs及其测试-重测的可靠性,当目标区域在初级运动皮层之外,特别是左角回、辅助运动区和内侧前额叶皮层。我们进行了三个相同的TMS-EEG会话,间隔一周,涉及24名健康参与者。在每次实验中,我们分别使用8字形经颅磁刺激线圈对活动经颅磁刺激进行定位,而另一个远离头部的线圈对假经颅磁刺激进行听觉输入。在这两种情况下,掩蔽噪声和头皮电刺激都可以获得与周围感觉输入相匹配的脑电图响应。在两种情况下均观察到较高的重测信度。然而,对于“清洁”的tep,可靠性下降了,这是由于对假经颅磁刺激的诱发脑电图反应从对活动的反应中减去了,特别是在经颅磁刺激脉冲后潜伏期> 100 ms的情况下。激活和假经颅磁刺激在潜伏期上有显著的脑电图差异
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain Topography
Brain Topography 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
41
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Brain Topography publishes clinical and basic research on cognitive neuroscience and functional neurophysiology using the full range of imaging techniques including EEG, MEG, fMRI, TMS, diffusion imaging, spectroscopy, intracranial recordings, lesion studies, and related methods. Submissions combining multiple techniques are particularly encouraged, as well as reports of new and innovative methodologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信