1
|
Heß T, Oehlwein C, Milani TL. Anticipatory Postural Adjustments and Compensatory Postural Responses to Multidirectional Perturbations-Effects of Medication and Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease. Brain Sci 2023; 13:brainsci13030454. [PMID: 36979264 PMCID: PMC10046463 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13030454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2023] [Revised: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/03/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postural instability is one of the most restricting motor symptoms for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). While medication therapy only shows minor effects, it is still unclear whether medication in conjunction with deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) improves postural stability. Hence, the aim of this study was to investigate whether PD patients treated with medication in conjunction with STN-DBS have superior postural control compared to patients treated with medication alone. METHODS Three study groups were tested: PD patients on medication (PD-MED), PD patients on medication and on STN-DBS (PD-MED-DBS), and healthy elderly subjects (HS) as a reference. Postural performance, including anticipatory postural adjustments (APA) prior to perturbation onset and compensatory postural responses (CPR) following multidirectional horizontal perturbations, was analyzed using force plate and electromyography data. RESULTS Regardless of the treatment condition, both patient groups showed inadequate APA and CPR with early and pronounced antagonistic muscle co-contractions compared to healthy elderly subjects. Comparing the treatment conditions, study group PD-MED-DBS only showed minor advantages over group PD-MED. In particular, group PD-MED-DBS showed faster postural reflexes and tended to have more physiological co-contraction ratios. CONCLUSION medication in conjunction with STN-DBS may have positive effects on the timing and amplitude of postural control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tobias Heß
- Department of Human Locomotion, Chemnitz University of Technology, 09126 Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Christian Oehlwein
- Neurological Outpatient Clinic for Parkinson Disease and Deep Brain Stimulation, 07551 Gera, Germany
| | - Thomas L Milani
- Department of Human Locomotion, Chemnitz University of Technology, 09126 Chemnitz, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
D’Onofrio V, Manzo N, Guerra A, Landi A, Baro V, Määttä S, Weis L, Porcaro C, Corbetta M, Antonini A, Ferreri F. Combining Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Deep Brain Stimulation: Current Knowledge, Relevance and Future Perspectives. Brain Sci 2023; 13:brainsci13020349. [PMID: 36831892 PMCID: PMC9954740 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13020349] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2023] [Revised: 02/13/2023] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has emerged as an invasive neuromodulation technique for the treatment of several neurological disorders, but the mechanisms underlying its effects remain partially elusive. In this context, the application of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) in patients treated with DBS represents an intriguing approach to investigate the neurophysiology of cortico-basal networks. Experimental studies combining TMS and DBS that have been performed so far have mainly aimed to evaluate the effects of DBS on the cerebral cortex and thus to provide insights into DBS's mechanisms of action. The modulation of cortical excitability and plasticity by DBS is emerging as a potential contributor to its therapeutic effects. Moreover, pairing DBS and TMS stimuli could represent a method to induce cortical synaptic plasticity, the therapeutic potential of which is still unexplored. Furthermore, the advent of new DBS technologies and novel treatment targets will present new research opportunities and prospects to investigate brain networks. However, the application of the combined TMS-DBS approach is currently limited by safety concerns. In this review, we sought to present an overview of studies performed by combining TMS and DBS in neurological disorders, as well as available evidence and recommendations on the safety of their combination. Additionally, we outline perspectives for future research by highlighting knowledge gaps and possible novel applications of this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nicoletta Manzo
- IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Via Alberoni 70, 0126 Venice, Italy
| | - Andrea Guerra
- IRCCS Neuromed, 86077 Pozzilli, Italy
- Department of Human Neurosciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Landi
- Academic Neurosurgery, Department of Neurosciences, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
| | - Valentina Baro
- Academic Neurosurgery, Department of Neurosciences, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
| | - Sara Määttä
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Kuopio University Hospital, University of Eastern Finland, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
| | - Luca Weis
- Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Centre for Rare Neurological Diseases (ERN-RND), University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
| | - Camillo Porcaro
- Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, 35129 Padova, Italy
- Department of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
- Institute of Cognitive Sciences, and Technologies (ISTC)-National Research Council (CNR), 00185 Rome, Italy
- Centre for Human Brain Health, School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
| | - Maurizio Corbetta
- Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, 35129 Padova, Italy
- Unit of Neurology, Unit of Clinical Neurophysiology, Study Center of Neurodegeneration (CESNE), Department of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
- Venetian Institute of Molecular Medicine, 35129 Padova, Italy
| | - Angelo Antonini
- Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Centre for Rare Neurological Diseases (ERN-RND), University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
- Unit of Neurology, Unit of Clinical Neurophysiology, Study Center of Neurodegeneration (CESNE), Department of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
- Department of Neurology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA
- Department of Neuroscience, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA
- Correspondence: (A.A.); (F.F.)
| | - Florinda Ferreri
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Kuopio University Hospital, University of Eastern Finland, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
- Unit of Neurology, Unit of Clinical Neurophysiology, Study Center of Neurodegeneration (CESNE), Department of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy
- Correspondence: (A.A.); (F.F.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Morrison-Ham J, Clark GM, Ellis EG, Cerins A, Joutsa J, Enticott PG, Corp DT. Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation in dystonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2022; 15:17562864221138144. [PMID: 36583118 PMCID: PMC9793065 DOI: 10.1177/17562864221138144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2022] [Accepted: 10/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Deep brain stimulation is a highly effective treatment of dystonia but is invasive and associated with risks, such as intraoperative bleeding and infections. Previous research has used non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) in an attempt to alleviate symptoms of dystonia. The results of these studies, however, have been variable, leaving efficacy unclear. Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the effects of NIBS on symptoms of dystonia and determine whether methodological characteristics are associated with variability in effect size. Methods Web of Science, Embase, and MEDLINE Complete databases were searched for articles using any type of NIBS as an intervention in dystonia patients, with changes in dystonia symptoms the primary outcome of interest. Results Meta-analysis of 27 studies demonstrated a small effect size for NIBS in reducing symptoms of dystonia (random-effects Hedges' g = 0.21, p = .002). Differences in the type of NIBS, type of dystonia, and brain region stimulated had a significant effect on dystonia symptoms. Meta-regression revealed that 10 sessions of active stimulation and the application of concurrent motor training programs resulted in significantly larger mean effect sizes. Conclusion NIBS has yielded small improvements to dystonic symptoms, but effect sizes depended on methodological characteristics, with more sessions of stimulation producing a larger response. Future research should further investigate the application of NIBS parallel to motor training, in addition to providing a greater quantity of sessions, to help define optimal parameters for NIBS protocols in dystonia. Registration PROSPERO 2020, CRD42020175944.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan Morrison-Ham
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of
Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, VIC 3125,
Australia
| | - Gillian M. Clark
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of
Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - Elizabeth G. Ellis
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of
Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - Andris Cerins
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of
Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - Juho Joutsa
- Turku Brain and Mind Center, Clinical
Neurosciences, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
- Turku PET Centre, Neurocenter, Turku University
Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Peter G. Enticott
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of
Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - Daniel T. Corp
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of
Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, VIC 3125,
Australia
- Center for Brain Circuit Therapeutics, Brigham
and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rossi S, Antal A, Bestmann S, Bikson M, Brewer C, Brockmöller J, Carpenter LL, Cincotta M, Chen R, Daskalakis JD, Di Lazzaro V, Fox MD, George MS, Gilbert D, Kimiskidis VK, Koch G, Ilmoniemi RJ, Lefaucheur JP, Leocani L, Lisanby SH, Miniussi C, Padberg F, Pascual-Leone A, Paulus W, Peterchev AV, Quartarone A, Rotenberg A, Rothwell J, Rossini PM, Santarnecchi E, Shafi MM, Siebner HR, Ugawa Y, Wassermann EM, Zangen A, Ziemann U, Hallett M. Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol 2021; 132:269-306. [PMID: 33243615 PMCID: PMC9094636 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2020.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 619] [Impact Index Per Article: 154.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2020] [Revised: 10/12/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
This article is based on a consensus conference, promoted and supported by the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN), which took place in Siena (Italy) in October 2018. The meeting intended to update the ten-year-old safety guidelines for the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical settings (Rossi et al., 2009). Therefore, only emerging and new issues are covered in detail, leaving still valid the 2009 recommendations regarding the description of conventional or patterned TMS protocols, the screening of subjects/patients, the need of neurophysiological monitoring for new protocols, the utilization of reference thresholds of stimulation, the managing of seizures and the list of minor side effects. New issues discussed in detail from the meeting up to April 2020 are safety issues of recently developed stimulation devices and pulse configurations; duties and responsibility of device makers; novel scenarios of TMS applications such as in the neuroimaging context or imaging-guided and robot-guided TMS; TMS interleaved with transcranial electrical stimulation; safety during paired associative stimulation interventions; and risks of using TMS to induce therapeutic seizures (magnetic seizure therapy). An update on the possible induction of seizures, theoretically the most serious risk of TMS, is provided. It has become apparent that such a risk is low, even in patients taking drugs acting on the central nervous system, at least with the use of traditional stimulation parameters and focal coils for which large data sets are available. Finally, new operational guidelines are provided for safety in planning future trials based on traditional and patterned TMS protocols, as well as a summary of the minimal training requirements for operators, and a note on ethics of neuroenhancement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Rossi
- Department of Scienze Mediche, Chirurgiche e Neuroscienze, Unit of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Brain Investigation and Neuromodulation Lab (SI-BIN Lab), University of Siena, Italy.
| | - Andrea Antal
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center, Georg-August University of Goettingen, Germany; Institue of Medical Psychology, Otto-Guericke University Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Sven Bestmann
- Department of Movement and Clinical Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK and Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK
| | - Marom Bikson
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, USA
| | - Carmen Brewer
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jürgen Brockmöller
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University Medical Center, Georg-August University of Goettingen, Germany
| | - Linda L Carpenter
- Butler Hospital, Brown University Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Massimo Cincotta
- Unit of Neurology of Florence - Central Tuscany Local Health Authority, Florence, Italy
| | - Robert Chen
- Krembil Research Institute and Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Canada
| | - Jeff D Daskalakis
- Center for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), University of Toronto, Canada
| | - Vincenzo Di Lazzaro
- Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology, Neurobiology, Department of Medicine, Università Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - Michael D Fox
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Mark S George
- Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Donald Gilbert
- Division of Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center and University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Vasilios K Kimiskidis
- Laboratory of Clinical Neurophysiology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA University Hospital, Greece
| | | | - Risto J Ilmoniemi
- Department of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering (NBE), Aalto University School of Science, Aalto, Finland
| | - Jean Pascal Lefaucheur
- EA 4391, ENT Team, Faculty of Medicine, Paris Est Creteil University (UPEC), Créteil, France; Clinical Neurophysiology Unit, Henri Mondor Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, (APHP), Créteil, France
| | - Letizia Leocani
- Department of Neurology, Institute of Experimental Neurology (INSPE), IRCCS-San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milano, Italy
| | - Sarah H Lisanby
- National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Carlo Miniussi
- Center for Mind/Brain Sciences - CIMeC, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy
| | - Frank Padberg
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research and Center for Memory Health, Hebrew SeniorLife, USA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Guttmann Brain Health Institut, Institut Guttmann, Universitat Autonoma Barcelona, Spain
| | - Walter Paulus
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center, Georg-August University of Goettingen, Germany
| | - Angel V Peterchev
- Departments of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, Electrical & Computer Engineering, and Neurosurgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Angelo Quartarone
- Department of Biomedical, Dental Sciences and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Alexander Rotenberg
- Department of Neurology, Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - John Rothwell
- Department of Movement and Clinical Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK and Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK
| | - Paolo M Rossini
- Department of Neuroscience and Rehabilitation, IRCCS San Raffaele-Pisana, Roma, Italy
| | - Emiliano Santarnecchi
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Mouhsin M Shafi
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hartwig R Siebner
- Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark; Institute for Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Yoshikatzu Ugawa
- Department of Human Neurophysiology, School of Medicine, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan
| | - Eric M Wassermann
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Abraham Zangen
- Zlotowski Center of Neuroscience, Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel
| | - Ulf Ziemann
- Department of Neurology & Stroke, and Hertie-Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tübingen, Germany
| | - Mark Hallett
- Human Motor Control Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Magsood H, Syeda F, Holloway K, Carmona IC, Hadimani RL. Safety Study of Combination Treatment: Deep Brain Stimulation and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. Front Hum Neurosci 2020; 14:123. [PMID: 32317954 PMCID: PMC7147373 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2019] [Accepted: 03/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD) often receive deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment, in which conductive leads are surgically implanted in the brain. While DBS treats tremor and rigidity, patients often continue to suffer from speech and swallowing impairments. There is preliminary evidence that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the cortex may be beneficial for these symptoms. However, the potential electromagnetic interactions of the strong magnetic fields from TMS on the conductive leads is unknown, and the combination therapy has not been approved for use. In this article, we report an experimental study of the safety of combining DBS and TMS. We fabricated an anatomically accurate head and brain phantom with electrical conductivities matching cerebrospinal fluid and averaged conductivity of gray and white matter. Induced current on an implanted DBS probe in the brain phantom was measured. Our results show that TMS will induce current values in the range or higher than typical DBS stimulation current. Thus, the combination of TMS/DBS treatment might cause over-stimulation in the brain when stimulated directly over the DBS lead with 100% TMS current intensity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hamzah Magsood
- Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States
| | - Farheen Syeda
- Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States
| | - Kathryn Holloway
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.,McGuire Research Institute, Hunter Holmes McGuire Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, Richmond, VA, United States.,Department of Neurosurgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Richmond, VA, United States
| | - Ivan C Carmona
- Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States
| | - Ravi L Hadimani
- Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Fečíková A, Jech R, Čejka V, Čapek V, Šťastná D, Štětkářová I, Mueller K, Schroeter ML, Růžička F, Urgošík D. Benefits of pallidal stimulation in dystonia are linked to cerebellar volume and cortical inhibition. Sci Rep 2018; 8:17218. [PMID: 30464181 PMCID: PMC6249276 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-34880-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2018] [Accepted: 10/26/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Clinical benefits of pallidal deep brain stimulation (GPi DBS) in dystonia increase relatively slowly suggesting slow plastic processes in the motor network. Twenty-two patients with dystonia of various distribution and etiology treated by chronic GPi DBS and 22 healthy subjects were examined for short-latency intracortical inhibition of the motor cortex elicited by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation. The relationships between grey matter volume and intracortical inhibition considering the long-term clinical outcome and states of the GPi DBS were analysed. The acute effects of GPi DBS were associated with a shortening of the motor response whereas the grey matter of chronically treated patients with a better clinical outcome showed hypertrophy of the supplementary motor area and cerebellar vermis. In addition, the volume of the cerebellar hemispheres of patients correlated with the improvement of intracortical inhibition which was generally less effective in patients than in controls regardless of the DBS states. Importantly, good responders to GPi DBS showed a similar level of short-latency intracortical inhibition in the motor cortex as healthy controls whereas non-responders were unable to increase it. All these results support the multilevel impact of effective DBS on the motor networks in dystonia and suggest potential biomarkers of responsiveness to this treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Fečíková
- Department of Neurology and Centre of Clinical Neuroscience, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Robert Jech
- Department of Neurology and Centre of Clinical Neuroscience, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
| | - Václav Čejka
- Department of Neurology and Centre of Clinical Neuroscience, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.,Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Václav Čapek
- Department of Neurology and Centre of Clinical Neuroscience, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Daniela Šťastná
- Department of Neurosurgery, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Ivana Štětkářová
- Department of Neurology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Faculty Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Karsten Mueller
- Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Matthias L Schroeter
- Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.,Clinic for Cognitive Neurology, University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Filip Růžička
- Department of Neurology and Centre of Clinical Neuroscience, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Dušan Urgošík
- Department of Stereotactic and Radiation Neurosurgery, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Hallett M, Di Iorio R, Rossini PM, Park JE, Chen R, Celnik P, Strafella AP, Matsumoto H, Ugawa Y. Contribution of transcranial magnetic stimulation to assessment of brain connectivity and networks. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128:2125-2139. [PMID: 28938143 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2016] [Revised: 07/31/2017] [Accepted: 08/12/2017] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
The goal of this review is to show how transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) techniques can make a contribution to the study of brain networks. Brain networks are fundamental in understanding how the brain operates. Effects on remote areas can be directly observed or identified after a period of stimulation, and each section of this review will discuss one method. EEG analyzed following TMS is called TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs). A conditioning TMS can influence the effect of a test TMS given over the motor cortex. A disynaptic connection can be tested also by assessing the effect of a pre-conditioning stimulus on the conditioning-test pair. Basal ganglia-cortical relationships can be assessed using electrodes placed in the process of deep brain stimulation therapy. Cerebellar-cortical relationships can be determined using TMS over the cerebellum. Remote effects of TMS on the brain can be found as well using neuroimaging, including both positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The methods complement each other since they give different views of brain networks, and it is often valuable to use more than one technique to achieve converging evidence. The final product of this type of work is to show how information is processed and transmitted in the brain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Hallett
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | - Riccardo Di Iorio
- Department of Geriatrics, Institute of Neurology, Neuroscience and Orthopedics, Catholic University, Policlinic A. Gemelli Foundation, Rome, Italy
| | - Paolo Maria Rossini
- Department of Geriatrics, Institute of Neurology, Neuroscience and Orthopedics, Catholic University, Policlinic A. Gemelli Foundation, Rome, Italy; Brain Connectivity Laboratory, IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, Rome, Italy
| | - Jung E Park
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA; Department of Neurology, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Robert Chen
- Krembil Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Medicine (Neurology), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Pablo Celnik
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, USA
| | - Antonio P Strafella
- Krembil Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Morton and Gloria Shulman Movement Disorder Unit & E.J. Safra Parkinson Disease Program, Toronto Western Hospital, UHN, Canada; Research Imaging Centre, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, CAMH, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Yoshikazu Ugawa
- Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Fukushima Medical University, Japan; Fukushima Global Medical Science Center, Advanced Clinical Research Center, Fukushima Medical University, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Antal A, Alekseichuk I, Bikson M, Brockmöller J, Brunoni AR, Chen R, Cohen LG, Dowthwaite G, Ellrich J, Flöel A, Fregni F, George MS, Hamilton R, Haueisen J, Herrmann CS, Hummel FC, Lefaucheur JP, Liebetanz D, Loo CK, McCaig CD, Miniussi C, Miranda PC, Moliadze V, Nitsche MA, Nowak R, Padberg F, Pascual-Leone A, Poppendieck W, Priori A, Rossi S, Rossini PM, Rothwell J, Rueger MA, Ruffini G, Schellhorn K, Siebner HR, Ugawa Y, Wexler A, Ziemann U, Hallett M, Paulus W. Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128:1774-1809. [PMID: 28709880 PMCID: PMC5985830 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 726] [Impact Index Per Article: 90.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2017] [Revised: 05/29/2017] [Accepted: 06/06/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Low intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) in humans, encompassing transcranial direct current (tDCS), transcutaneous spinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS), transcranial alternating current (tACS), and transcranial random noise (tRNS) stimulation or their combinations, appears to be safe. No serious adverse events (SAEs) have been reported so far in over 18,000 sessions administered to healthy subjects, neurological and psychiatric patients, as summarized here. Moderate adverse events (AEs), as defined by the necessity to intervene, are rare, and include skin burns with tDCS due to suboptimal electrode-skin contact. Very rarely mania or hypomania was induced in patients with depression (11 documented cases), yet a causal relationship is difficult to prove because of the low incidence rate and limited numbers of subjects in controlled trials. Mild AEs (MAEs) include headache and fatigue following stimulation as well as prickling and burning sensations occurring during tDCS at peak-to-baseline intensities of 1-2mA and during tACS at higher peak-to-peak intensities above 2mA. The prevalence of published AEs is different in studies specifically assessing AEs vs. those not assessing them, being higher in the former. AEs are frequently reported by individuals receiving placebo stimulation. The profile of AEs in terms of frequency, magnitude and type is comparable in healthy and clinical populations, and this is also the case for more vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly persons, or pregnant women. Combined interventions (e.g., co-application of drugs, electrophysiological measurements, neuroimaging) were not associated with further safety issues. Safety is established for low-intensity 'conventional' TES defined as <4mA, up to 60min duration per day. Animal studies and modeling evidence indicate that brain injury could occur at predicted current densities in the brain of 6.3-13A/m2 that are over an order of magnitude above those produced by tDCS in humans. Using AC stimulation fewer AEs were reported compared to DC. In specific paradigms with amplitudes of up to 10mA, frequencies in the kHz range appear to be safe. In this paper we provide structured interviews and recommend their use in future controlled studies, in particular when trying to extend the parameters applied. We also discuss recent regulatory issues, reporting practices and ethical issues. These recommendations achieved consensus in a meeting, which took place in Göttingen, Germany, on September 6-7, 2016 and were refined thereafter by email correspondence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Antal
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Georg August University, Göttingen, Germany.
| | - I Alekseichuk
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Georg August University, Göttingen, Germany
| | - M Bikson
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, USA
| | - J Brockmöller
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Germany
| | - A R Brunoni
- Service of Interdisciplinary Neuromodulation, Department and Institute of Psychiatry, Laboratory of Neurosciences (LIM-27) and Interdisciplinary Center for Applied Neuromodulation University Hospital, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - R Chen
- Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto and Krembil Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - L G Cohen
- Human Cortical Physiology and Neurorehabilitation Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke NIH, Bethesda, USA
| | | | - J Ellrich
- Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark; Institute of Physiology and Pathophysiology, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany; EBS Technologies GmbH, Europarc Dreilinden, Germany
| | - A Flöel
- Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie, Greifswald, Germany
| | - F Fregni
- Spaulding Neuromodulation Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - M S George
- Brain Stimulation Division, Medical University of South Carolina, and Ralph H. Johnson Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - R Hamilton
- Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - J Haueisen
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Informatics, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Germany
| | - C S Herrmann
- Experimental Psychology Lab, Department of Psychology, European Medical School, Carl von Ossietzky Universität, Oldenburg, Germany
| | - F C Hummel
- Defitech Chair of Clinical Neuroengineering, Centre of Neuroprosthetics (CNP) and Brain Mind Institute, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL), Geneva, Switzerland; Defitech Chair of Clinical Neuroengineering, Clinique Romande de Réadaptation, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL Valais), Sion, Switzerland
| | - J P Lefaucheur
- Department of Physiology, Henri Mondor Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, and EA 4391, Nerve Excitability and Therapeutic Team (ENT), Faculty of Medicine, Paris Est Créteil University, Créteil, France
| | - D Liebetanz
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Georg August University, Göttingen, Germany
| | - C K Loo
- School of Psychiatry & Black Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - C D McCaig
- Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
| | - C Miniussi
- Center for Mind/Brain Sciences CIMeC, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy; Cognitive Neuroscience Section, IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy
| | - P C Miranda
- Institute of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
| | - V Moliadze
- Institute of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany
| | - M A Nitsche
- Department of Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Dortmund, Germany; Department of Neurology, University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Bochum, Germany
| | - R Nowak
- Neuroelectrics, Barcelona, Spain
| | - F Padberg
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Munich Center for Brain Stimulation, Ludwig-Maximilian University Munich, Germany
| | - A Pascual-Leone
- Division of Cognitive Neurology, Harvard Medical Center and Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, USA
| | - W Poppendieck
- Department of Information Technology, Mannheim University of Applied Sciences, Mannheim, Germany
| | - A Priori
- Center for Neurotechnology and Experimental Brain Therapeutich, Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan Italy; Deparment of Clinical Neurology, University Hospital Asst Santi Paolo E Carlo, Milan, Italy
| | - S Rossi
- Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, Human Physiology Section and Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology Section, Brain Investigation & Neuromodulation Lab, University of Siena, Italy
| | - P M Rossini
- Area of Neuroscience, Institute of Neurology, University Clinic A. Gemelli, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | | | - M A Rueger
- Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Cologne, Germany
| | | | | | - H R Siebner
- Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark; Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Y Ugawa
- Department of Neurology, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan; Fukushima Global Medical Science Center, Advanced Clinical Research Center, Fukushima Medical University, Japan
| | - A Wexler
- Department of Science, Technology & Society, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - U Ziemann
- Department of Neurology & Stroke, and Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - M Hallett
- Human Motor Control Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - W Paulus
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Georg August University, Göttingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Narayana S, Papanicolaou AC, McGregor A, Boop FA, Wheless JW. Clinical Applications of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Pediatric Neurology. J Child Neurol 2015; 30:1111-24. [PMID: 25342309 DOI: 10.1177/0883073814553274] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2014] [Accepted: 09/07/2014] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Noninvasive brain stimulation is now an accepted technique that is used as a diagnostic aid and in the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders in adults, and is being increasingly used in children. In this review, we will discuss the basic principles and safety of one noninvasive brain stimulation method, transcranial magnetic stimulation. Improvements in the spatial accuracy of transcranial magnetic stimulation are described in the context of image-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation. The article describes and provides examples of the current clinical applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation in children as an aid in the diagnosis and treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders and discusses future potential applications. Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a noninvasive tool that is safe for use in children and adolescents for functional mapping and treatment, and for many children it aids in the preoperative evaluation and the risk-benefit decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shalini Narayana
- Division of Clinical Neurosciences, Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA Le Bonheur Neuroscience Institute, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Andrew C Papanicolaou
- Division of Clinical Neurosciences, Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA Le Bonheur Neuroscience Institute, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Amy McGregor
- Le Bonheur Neuroscience Institute, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA Division of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Frederick A Boop
- Le Bonheur Neuroscience Institute, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - James W Wheless
- Le Bonheur Neuroscience Institute, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA Division of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Inadequate modulation of excitability with voluntary dorsiflexion in Parkinson's disease. J Clin Neurophysiol 2014; 31:175-9. [PMID: 24691237 DOI: 10.1097/wnp.0000000000000037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Freezing phenomenon at onset of movement causes gait disturbance in Parkinson's disease (PD), but the pathophysiology is unclear. We studied motor property at onset of dorsiflexion in PD. METHODS In 9 patients with PD and 8 normal subjects, motor evoked potential was recorded from the tibialis anterior muscle under 3 conditions: at rest, during tonic contraction, and at onset of contraction. Motor threshold, size of motor evoked potential and the relationship between the intensity of transcranial magnetic stimulation, and the size of motor evoked potentials (recruitment gain) were examined. RESULTS Motor threshold decreased with voluntary contraction in both PD and normal subjects, but the threshold at rest and during tonic contraction was lower in Parkinson's disease. The size of motor evoked potential with maximal stimulus intensity increased with voluntary contraction in both groups; this tendency was more pronounced in normal subjects. The recruitment gain during contraction was steeper than at rest in normal subjects. However, there was no such increase in PD. CONCLUSIONS There was no increase in recruitment gain with voluntary contraction in PD, which was obvious in normal subjects, especially at onset of voluntary contraction. Modulation of motor excitability at onset of voluntary contraction was impaired in PD.
Collapse
|
11
|
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) Safety Considerations and Recommendations. TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION 2014. [DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0879-0_2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
|
12
|
Vonloh M, Chen R, Kluger B. Safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation in Parkinson's disease: a review of the literature. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2013; 19:573-85. [PMID: 23473718 DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2013.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2012] [Revised: 12/18/2012] [Accepted: 01/13/2013] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been used in both physiological studies and, more recently, the therapy of Parkinson's disease (PD). Prior TMS studies in healthy subjects and other patient populations demonstrate a slight risk of seizures and other adverse events. Our goal was to estimate these risks and document other safety concerns specific to PD patients. METHODS We performed an English-Language literature search through PudMed to review all TMS studies involving PD patients. We documented any seizures or other adverse events associated with these studies. Crude risks were calculated per subject and per session of TMS. RESULTS We identified 84 single pulse (spTMS) and/or paired-pulse (ppTMS) TMS studies involving 1091 patients and 77 repetitive TMS (rTMS) studies involving 1137 patients. Risk of adverse events was low in all protocols. spTMS and ppTMS risk per patient for any adverse event was 0.0018 (95% CI: 0.0002-0.0066) per patient and no seizures were encountered. Risk of an adverse event from rTMS was 0.040 (95% CI: 0.029-0.053) per patient and no seizures were reported. Other adverse events included transient headaches, scalp pain, tinnitus, nausea, increase in pre-existing pain, and muscle jerks. Transient worsening of Parkinsonian symptoms was noted in one study involving rTMS of the supplementary motor area (SMA). CONCLUSION We conclude that current TMS and rTMS protocols do not pose significant risks to PD patients. We would recommend that TMS users in this population follow the most recent safety guidelines but do not warrant additional precautions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Vonloh
- Department of Neurology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
There have been a large number of basic research studies of noninvasive brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease. Initial work focused on measuring: (1) the excitability of corticospinal output with threshold and input-output measures, and (2) the effectiveness of intracortical γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)ergic inhibitory systems using short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI), and silent period measures. Early suggestions of increased excitability and reduced inhibition have been progressively modified. There are conflicting reports on changes in excitability, silent period, and LICI, and the more consistent reduction in SICI is now viewed as a superimposed excitation rather than a primary deficit in a GABAergic mechanism. A small number of studies have suggested that premovement increases in corticospinal excitability may be prolonged in Parkinson's disease, consistent with the suggestion of slower buildup of the motor command to move; there are also modifications of interhemispheric connections in patients with mirror movements. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has also been used to explore the involvement of motor cortex and cerebellum in resting and postural tremors by examining how readily they can be reset by single TMS pulses over each area. It can also probe the effects of deep brain stimulation of motor cortex excitability. Finally, new TMS techniques that examine synaptic plasticity in motor cortex have shown reduced excitability in patients off therapy which is restored when on therapy. Data are also emerging about the possible role of cortical plasticity in compensating for gradual loss of dopaminergic function prior to onset of clinical symptoms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John C Rothwell
- Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Lefaucheur JP, André-Obadia N, Poulet E, Devanne H, Haffen E, Londero A, Cretin B, Leroi AM, Radtchenko A, Saba G, Thai-Van H, Litré CF, Vercueil L, Bouhassira D, Ayache SS, Farhat WH, Zouari HG, Mylius V, Nicolier M, Garcia-Larrea L. [French guidelines on the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): safety and therapeutic indications]. Neurophysiol Clin 2011; 41:221-95. [PMID: 22153574 DOI: 10.1016/j.neucli.2011.10.062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 86] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2011] [Accepted: 10/18/2011] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
During the past decade, a large amount of work on transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been performed, including the development of new paradigms of stimulation, the integration of imaging data, and the coupling of TMS techniques with electroencephalography or neuroimaging. These accumulating data being difficult to synthesize, several French scientific societies commissioned a group of experts to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on TMS. This text contains all the consensual findings of the expert group on the mechanisms of action, safety rules and indications of TMS, including repetitive TMS (rTMS). TMS sessions have been conducted in thousands of healthy subjects or patients with various neurological or psychiatric diseases, allowing a better assessment of risks associated with this technique. The number of reported side effects is extremely low, the most serious complication being the occurrence of seizures. In most reported seizures, the stimulation parameters did not follow the previously published recommendations (Wassermann, 1998) [430] and rTMS was associated to medication that could lower the seizure threshold. Recommendations on the safe use of TMS / rTMS were recently updated (Rossi et al., 2009) [348], establishing new limits for stimulation parameters and fixing the contraindications. The recommendations we propose regarding safety are largely based on this previous report with some modifications. By contrast, the issue of therapeutic indications of rTMS has never been addressed before, the present work being the first attempt of a synthesis and expert consensus on this topic. The use of TMS/rTMS is discussed in the context of chronic pain, movement disorders, stroke, epilepsy, tinnitus and psychiatric disorders. There is already a sufficient level of evidence of published data to retain a therapeutic indication of rTMS in clinical practice (grade A) in chronic neuropathic pain, major depressive episodes, and auditory hallucinations. The number of therapeutic indications of rTMS is expected to increase in coming years, in parallel with the optimisation of stimulation parameters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J-P Lefaucheur
- EA 4391, faculté de médecine, université Paris-Est-Créteil, 51, avenue du Maréchal-de-Lattre-de-Tassigny, 94010 Créteil, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Règles de sécurité concernant la pratique de la stimulation magnétique transcrânienne en clinique et en recherche. Texte de consensus. Neurophysiol Clin 2011. [DOI: 10.1016/j.neucli.2011.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
|
16
|
Deng ZD, Lisanby SH, Peterchev AV. Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the presence of deep brain stimulation implants: Induced electrode currents. ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE IEEE ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY. IEEE ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY. ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE 2011; 2010:6821-4. [PMID: 21095849 DOI: 10.1109/iembs.2010.5625958] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
The safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with an implanted deep brain stimulation (DBS) systems has not been thoroughly investigated. One potential safety hazard is the induction of significant voltages in the subcutaneous leads in the scalp that could result in unintended electrical currents in the DBS electrode contacts. We measured ex-vivo the TMS-induced voltages and currents in DBS electrodes with the implantable pulse generator (IPG) set in various modes of operation. We show that voltages as high as 100 V resulting in currents as high as 83 mA can be induced in the DBS leads by a TMS pulse in all IPG modes. These currents are an order of magnitude higher than the normal DBS pulses, and could result in tissue damage. When the IPG is turned off, electrode currents flow only if the TMS-induced voltage exceeds 5 V.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhi-De Deng
- Department of Electrical Engineering, Columbia University / New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY 10032, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Dissociation of motor symptoms during deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in the region of the internal capsule. Exp Neurol 2010; 228:294-7. [PMID: 20713049 DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2010.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2010] [Revised: 07/22/2010] [Accepted: 08/10/2010] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) can be an effective treatment for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease. The therapeutic benefits are voltage-dependent and, in many cases, limited by the appearance of side effects, including muscle contractions. We have observed a number of clinical cases where improvements in rigidity were accompanied by a worsening of bradykinesia. Considering the anatomic position of STN and current approaches to implantation of the DBS lead, we hypothesized that this dissociation of motor symptoms arises from activation of pyramidal tract fibers in the adjacent internal capsule. The objective of this study was to assess the physiological basis for this dissociation and to test our hypothesis that the underlying etiology of this paradox is activation of fibers of the internal capsule. The effect of STN DBS at 80% of motor threshold for each of the four contacts was evaluated for its effect on rigidity, bradykinesia, and akinesia in a single primate with 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-induced parkinsonism. Consistent with our observations in humans, this near-threshold stimulation was found to improve rigidity while bradykinesia and akinesia worsened. Worsening bradykinesia in the face of improvement of other motor signs in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients is suggestive of activation of pyramidal tract (PT) fibers during stimulation. This phenomenon may occur without overt muscle contraction and improved rigidity.
Collapse
|
18
|
The safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation with deep brain stimulation instruments. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2010; 16:127-31. [DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2009.09.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2009] [Revised: 09/14/2009] [Accepted: 09/17/2009] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
19
|
Kuriakose R, Saha U, Castillo G, Udupa K, Ni Z, Gunraj C, Mazzella F, Hamani C, Lang AE, Moro E, Lozano AM, Hodaie M, Chen R. The Nature and Time Course of Cortical Activation Following Subthalamic Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease. Cereb Cortex 2009; 20:1926-36. [DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhp269] [Citation(s) in RCA: 103] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
|
20
|
Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A. Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol 2009; 120:2008-2039. [PMID: 19833552 PMCID: PMC3260536 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3710] [Impact Index Per Article: 231.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2009] [Revised: 08/12/2009] [Accepted: 08/21/2009] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
This article is based on a consensus conference, which took place in Certosa di Pontignano, Siena (Italy) on March 7-9, 2008, intended to update the previous safety guidelines for the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical settings. Over the past decade the scientific and medical community has had the opportunity to evaluate the safety record of research studies and clinical applications of TMS and repetitive TMS (rTMS). In these years the number of applications of conventional TMS has grown impressively, new paradigms of stimulation have been developed (e.g., patterned repetitive TMS) and technical advances have led to new device designs and to the real-time integration of TMS with electroencephalography (EEG), positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Thousands of healthy subjects and patients with various neurological and psychiatric diseases have undergone TMS allowing a better assessment of relative risks. The occurrence of seizures (i.e., the most serious TMS-related acute adverse effect) has been extremely rare, with most of the few new cases receiving rTMS exceeding previous guidelines, often in patients under treatment with drugs which potentially lower the seizure threshold. The present updated guidelines review issues of risk and safety of conventional TMS protocols, address the undesired effects and risks of emerging TMS interventions, the applications of TMS in patients with implanted electrodes in the central nervous system, and safety aspects of TMS in neuroimaging environments. We cover recommended limits of stimulation parameters and other important precautions, monitoring of subjects, expertise of the rTMS team, and ethical issues. While all the recommendations here are expert based, they utilize published data to the extent possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Rossi
- Dipartimento di Neuroscienze, Sezione Neurologia, Università di Siena, Italy.
| | - Mark Hallett
- Human Motor Control Section, NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, USA
| | - Paolo M Rossini
- Università Campus Biomedico, Roma, Italy; Casa di Cura S. Raffaele, Cassino, Italy
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Bäumer T, Hidding U, Hamel W, Buhmann C, Moll CK, Gerloff C, Orth M, Siebner HR, Münchau A. Effects of DBS, premotor rTMS, and levodopa on motor function and silent period in advanced Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 2009; 24:672-6. [DOI: 10.1002/mds.22417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
|
22
|
Gaynor LMFD, Kühn AA, Dileone M, Litvak V, Eusebio A, Pogosyan A, Androulidakis AG, Tisch S, Limousin P, Insola A, Mazzone P, Di Lazzaro V, Brown P. Suppression of beta oscillations in the subthalamic nucleus following cortical stimulation in humans. Eur J Neurosci 2008; 28:1686-95. [PMID: 18657185 PMCID: PMC2695156 DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06363.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
It is unclear how subthalamic nucleus activity is modulated by the cerebral cortex. Here we investigate the effect of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the cortex on oscillatory subthalamic local field potential activity in the 8–35 Hz (alpha/beta) band, as exaggerated synchronization in this band is implicated in the pathophysiology of parkinsonism. We studied nine patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) to test whether cortical stimulation can modulate synchronized oscillations in the human subthalamic nucleus. With patients at rest, single-pulse TMS was delivered every 5 s over each primary motor area and supplementary motor area at intensities of 85–115% resting motor threshold. Subthalamic local field potentials were recorded from deep brain stimulation electrodes implanted into this nucleus for the treatment of PD. Motor cortical stimulation suppressed beta activity in the subthalamic nucleus from ∼0.2 to 0.6 s after TMS (repeated measures anova; main effect of time, P<0.01; main effect of side, P=0.03), regardless of intensity. TMS over the supplementary motor area also reduced subthalamic beta activity at 95% (P=0.05) and 115% resting motor threshold (P=0.01). The oscillatory activity decreased to 80 ± 26% of baseline (averaged across sites and stimulation intensities). Suppression with subthreshold stimuli confirmed that these changes were centrally driven and not due to peripheral afference. The results may have implications for mechanisms underlying the reported therapeutic benefits of cortical stimulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L M F Doyle Gaynor
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|