4.6 Article

Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation does not decrease the variability of motor-evoked potentials

期刊

BRAIN STIMULATION
卷 3, 期 2, 页码 87-94

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2009.10.003

关键词

transcranial magnetic stimulation; navigation; variability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background One maim attribute of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is the variability of motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes. to which variations of coil positioning may contribute Navigated TMS allows the investigator to net a stimulation site with an accuracy of 2 5 mm and to retain position with low spatial divergence during stimulation Objective The purpose of this study was to investigate whether increased spatial constancy of the cod using, a navigational system decreases the variability of MEP amplitudes and increases their reproducibility between different points in time of investigation Methods We investigated eight healthy subjects (mean age 23 8 +/- 1 2 years. range 22-25. four women, foul men) at three different points in time with and without an optically tracked frameless navigational device, respectively Input-output curves, motor threshold. and MEP amplitudes were recorded We calculated the coefficient of variation as statistical parameter of variability Reproducibility between different sessions was assessed via the MEP amplitude Results The coefficient of variance of MEP amplitudes did not show a distinct difference between navigated and non-navigated TMS in input-output curves MEP amplitudes. indicating reproducibility. did not significantly differ between sessions with and without navigated TMS. either Conclusions Our results do not support the hypothesis that increased spatial constancy using a navigational system improves variability and reproducibility of MEP amplitudes Variability of MEN might mainly be due to not influenceable neurophysiologic factors such as undulant cortical excitability and spinal desynchronization (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc 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