Aftereffects of Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation in Adjacent, Non-target Muscles.

Clicks: 325
ID: 38845
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #11 of 21 articles by views in neuroscience

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
To assess motor cortex neurophysiology, including the mechanisms of neuroplasticity, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is typically applied to the motor "hotspot"- the optimal site for inducing a twitch in a given target muscle. It is known that the effects of suprathreshold repetitive TMS (rTMS) spread along functional connections beyond the specific cortical stimulation target, and yet, it is unknown whether the aftereffects of subthreshold intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS), an ultra-high frequency patterned rTMS protocol, extend beyond the targeted muscle. We investigated whether and to what extent iTBS induces changes in the cortical output to other intrinsic hand muscles with adjacent cortical representation to the target. 16 healthy adults underwent neuronavigated TMS-iTBS targeting the first dorsal interosseus (FDI) hotspot. Proportion of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) at the resting motor threshold (RMT), baseline MEP amplitude, and iTBS-induced changes in MEP amplitude were compared between FDI, abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM) muscles. MEP amplitudes recorded from the three muscles at RMT and suprathreshold intensities indicated the chosen hotspots were relatively selective for FDI. Nevertheless, iTBS induced significant facilitation of MEPs recorded from both FDI and APB, but not ADM. Surprisingly, the MEP modulation was greater in APB, even when controlling for the baseline MEP amplitude. These results indicate that iTBS modulation of cortico-spinal excitability extends beyond the representation of the targeted muscle. Results have implications both for how iTBS may be used in clinical treatment and for the safety guidelines for the application of iTBS.
Reference Key
morris2019aftereffectsneuroscience Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Morris, Timothy P;Davila-Pérez, Paula;Jannati, Ali;Menardi, Arianna;Pascual-Leone, Alvaro;Fried, Peter J;
Journal neuroscience
Year 2019
DOI
S0306-4522(19)30625-6
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.