1
|
de Albuquerque LL, Pantovic M, Wilkins EW, Morris D, Clingo M, Boss S, Riley ZA, Poston B. Exploring the Influence of Inter-Trial Interval on the Assessment of Short-Interval Intracortical Inhibition. Bioengineering (Basel) 2024; 11:645. [PMID: 39061727 PMCID: PMC11274151 DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11070645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2024] [Revised: 06/05/2024] [Accepted: 06/17/2024] [Indexed: 07/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) is a common paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measure used to assess primary motor cortex (M1) interneuron activity in healthy populations and in neurological disorders. Many of the parameters of TMS stimulation to most accurately measure SICI have been determined. However, one TMS parameter that has not been investigated is the time between SICI trials (termed inter-trial interval; ITI). This is despite a series of single-pulse TMS studies which have reported that motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude were suppressed for short, but not long ITIs in approximately the initial ten trials of a TMS block of 20-30 trials. The primary purpose was to examine the effects of ITI on the quantification of SICI at rest. A total of 23 healthy adults completed an experimental session that included four SICI trial blocks. Each block utilized a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s) and was comprised of a total of 26 SICI trials divided into three epochs. ANOVA revealed that the main effects for ITI and epoch as well as their interaction were all non-statistically significant for SICI. We conclude that the shorter (4-6 s) ITIs used in studies investigating SICI should not alter the interpretation of M1 activity, while having the advantages of being more comfortable to participants and reducing the experimental time needed to evaluate perform single and paired-pulse TMS experiments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lidio Lima de Albuquerque
- School of Health and Applied Human Sciences, University of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, NC 28403, USA;
| | - Milan Pantovic
- Health and Human Performance Department, Utah Tech University, St. George, UT 84770, USA;
| | - Erik W. Wilkins
- Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA;
| | - Desiree Morris
- School of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA; (D.M.); (M.C.)
| | - Mitchell Clingo
- School of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA; (D.M.); (M.C.)
| | - Sage Boss
- School of Life Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA;
| | - Zachary A. Riley
- Department of Kinesiology, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA;
| | - Brach Poston
- Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pantovic M, Boss R, Noorda KJ, Premyanov MI, Aynlender DG, Wilkins EW, Boss S, Riley ZA, Poston B. The Influence of Different Inter-Trial Intervals on the Quantification of Intracortical Facilitation in the Primary Motor Cortex. Bioengineering (Basel) 2023; 10:1278. [PMID: 38002401 PMCID: PMC10669180 DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10111278] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2023] [Revised: 10/29/2023] [Accepted: 10/30/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Intracortical facilitation (ICF) is a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measurement used to quantify interneuron activity in the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy populations and motor disorders. Due to the prevalence of the technique, most of the stimulation parameters to optimize ICF quantification have been established. However, the underappreciated methodological issue of the time between ICF trials (inter-trial interval; ITI) has been unstandardized, and different ITIs have never been compared in a paired-pulse TMS study. This is important because single-pulse TMS studies have found motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude reductions over time during TMS trial blocks for short, but not long ITIs. The primary purpose was to determine the influence of different ITIs on the measurement of ICF. Twenty adults completed one experimental session that involved 4 separate ICF trial blocks with each utilizing a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s). Two-way ANOVAs indicated no significant ITI main effects for test MEP amplitudes, condition-test MEP amplitudes, and therefore ICF. Accordingly, all ITIs studied provided nearly identical ICF values when averaged over entire trial blocks. Therefore, it is recommended that ITIs of 4-6 s be utilized for ICF quantification to optimize participant comfort and experiment time efficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Milan Pantovic
- Health and Human Performance Department, Utah Tech University, St. George, UT 84770, USA;
| | - Rhett Boss
- School of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA; (R.B.); (K.J.N.); (M.I.P.); (D.G.A.)
| | - Kevin J. Noorda
- School of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA; (R.B.); (K.J.N.); (M.I.P.); (D.G.A.)
| | - Mario I. Premyanov
- School of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA; (R.B.); (K.J.N.); (M.I.P.); (D.G.A.)
| | - Daniel G. Aynlender
- School of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA; (R.B.); (K.J.N.); (M.I.P.); (D.G.A.)
| | - Erik W. Wilkins
- Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA;
| | - Sage Boss
- School of Life Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA;
| | - Zachary A. Riley
- Department of Kinesiology, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA;
| | - Brach Poston
- Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hosseinian T, Yavari F, Biagi MC, Kuo MF, Ruffini G, Nitsche MA, Jamil A. External induction and stabilization of brain oscillations in the human. Brain Stimul 2021; 14:579-587. [PMID: 33781955 PMCID: PMC8144019 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2021.03.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2020] [Revised: 02/18/2021] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Neural oscillations in the cerebral cortex are associated with a range of cognitive processes and neuropsychiatric disorders. However, non-invasively modulating oscillatory activity remains technically challenging, due to limited strength, duration, or non-synchronization of stimulation waveforms with endogenous rhythms. Objective We hypothesized that applying controllable phase-synchronized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation pulses (rTMS) with alternating currents (tACS) may induce and stabilize neuro-oscillatory resting-state activity at targeted frequencies. Methods Using a novel circuit to precisely synchronize rTMS pulses with phase of tACS, we empirically tested whether combined, 10-Hz prefrontal bilateral stimulation could induce and stabilize 10-Hz oscillations in the bilateral prefrontal cortex (PFC). 25 healthy participants took part in a repeated-measures design. Whole-brain resting-state EEG in eyes-open (EO) and eyes-closed (EC) was recorded before (baseline), immediately (1-min), and 15- and 30-min after stimulation. Bilateral, phase-synchronized rTMS aligned to the positive tACS peak was compared with rTMS at tACS trough, with bilateral tACS or rTMS on its own, and to sham. Results 10-Hz resting-state PFC power increased significantly with peak-synchronized rTMS + tACS (EO: 44.64%, EC: 46.30%, p < 0.05) compared to each stimulation protocol on its own, and sham, with effects spanning between prefrontal and parietal regions and sustaining throughout 30-min. No effects were observed with the sham protocol. Moreover, rTMS timed to the negative tACS trough did not induce local or global changes in oscillations. Conclusion Phase-synchronizing rTMS with tACS may be a viable approach for inducing and stabilizing neuro-oscillatory activity, particularly in scenarios where endogenous oscillatory tone is attenuated, such as disorders of consciousness or major depression. Non-invasively inducing and stabilizing neural oscillations remains challenging. We develop a controllable phase-synchronized circuit to combine rTMS and tACS. This circuit was tested for inducing 10 Hz oscillations in healthy prefrontal cortex. 10 Hz rTMS synchronized to the positive 10 Hz tACS peak induced stable after-effects. Phase-synchronized stimulation is a viable approach for oscillatory neuromodulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiam Hosseinian
- Dept. Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors. Dortmund, Germany
| | - Fatemeh Yavari
- Dept. Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors. Dortmund, Germany
| | | | - Min-Fang Kuo
- Dept. Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors. Dortmund, Germany
| | | | - Michael A Nitsche
- Dept. Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors. Dortmund, Germany; Dept. Neurology, University Medical Hospital Bergmannsheil, Bochum, Germany.
| | - Asif Jamil
- Dept. Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors. Dortmund, Germany; Laboratory for Neuropsychiatry & Neuromodulation, Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts General 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: 524] [Impact Index Per Article: 174.7] [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
|
Guerra A, Asci F, Zampogna A, D'Onofrio V, Petrucci S, Ginevrino M, Berardelli A, Suppa A. Gamma-transcranial alternating current stimulation and theta-burst stimulation: inter-subject variability and the role of BDNF. Clin Neurophysiol 2020; 131:2691-2699. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2020.08.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2020] [Revised: 08/03/2020] [Accepted: 08/11/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
6
|
Guerra A, Suppa A, Bologna M, D'Onofrio V, Bianchini E, Brown P, Di Lazzaro V, Berardelli A. Boosting the LTP-like plasticity effect of intermittent theta-burst stimulation using gamma transcranial alternating current stimulation. Brain Stimul 2018; 11:734-742. [PMID: 29615367 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2018.03.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2017] [Revised: 02/27/2018] [Accepted: 03/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) consists in delivering electric current to the brain using an oscillatory pattern that may entrain the rhythmic activity of cortical neurons. When delivered at gamma frequency, tACS modulates motor performance and GABA-A-ergic interneuron activity. OBJECTIVE Since interneuronal discharges play a crucial role in brain plasticity phenomena, here we co-stimulated the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy subjects by means of tACS during intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS), a transcranial magnetic stimulation paradigm known to induce long-term potentiation (LTP)-like plasticity. METHODS We measured and compared motor evoked potentials before and after gamma, beta and sham tACS-iTBS. While we delivered gamma-tACS, we also measured short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) to detect any changes in GABA-A-ergic neurotransmission. RESULTS Gamma, but not beta and sham tACS, significantly boosted and prolonged the iTBS-induced after-effects. Interestingly, the extent of the gamma tACS-iTBS after-effects correlated directly with SICI changes. CONCLUSIONS Overall, our findings point to a link between gamma oscillations, interneuronal GABA-A-ergic activity and LTP-like plasticity in the human M1. Gamma tACS-iTBS co-stimulation might represent a new strategy to enhance and prolong responses to plasticity-inducing protocols, thereby lending itself to future applications in the neurorehabilitation setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Guerra
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale dell'Università 30, 00185, Rome, Italy
| | - Antonio Suppa
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale dell'Università 30, 00185, Rome, Italy; IRCCS Neuromed Institute, Via Atinense 18, 86077, Pozzilli, IS, Italy
| | - Matteo Bologna
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale dell'Università 30, 00185, Rome, Italy; IRCCS Neuromed Institute, Via Atinense 18, 86077, Pozzilli, IS, Italy
| | - Valentina D'Onofrio
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale dell'Università 30, 00185, Rome, Italy
| | - Edoardo Bianchini
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale dell'Università 30, 00185, Rome, Italy
| | - Peter Brown
- Medical Research Council Brain Network Dynamics Unit and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 9DU, United Kingdom
| | - Vincenzo Di Lazzaro
- Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology, Neurobiology, Department of Medicine, University Campus Bio-Medico, via Álvaro del Portillo 21, 00128, Rome, Italy
| | - Alfredo Berardelli
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale dell'Università 30, 00185, Rome, Italy; IRCCS Neuromed Institute, Via Atinense 18, 86077, Pozzilli, IS, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Chung SW, Hill AT, Rogasch NC, Hoy KE, Fitzgerald PB. Use of theta-burst stimulation in changing excitability of motor cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2016; 63:43-64. [PMID: 26850210 DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 165] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2015] [Revised: 12/30/2015] [Accepted: 01/26/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Noninvasive brain stimulation has been demonstrated to modulate cortical activity in humans. In particular, theta burst stimulation (TBS) has gained notable attention due to its ability to induce lasting physiological changes after short stimulation durations. The present study aimed to provide a comprehensive meta-analytic review of the efficacy of two TBS paradigms; intermittent (iTBS) and continuous (cTBS), on corticospinal excitability in healthy individuals. Literature searches yielded a total of 87 studies adhering to the inclusion criteria. iTBS yielded moderately large MEP increases lasting up to 30 min with a pooled SMD of 0.71 (p<0.00001). cTBS produced a reduction in MEP amplitudes lasting up to 60 min, with the largest effect size seen at 5 min post stimulation (SMD=-0.9, P<0.00001). The collected studies were of heterogeneous nature, and a series of tests conducted indicated a degree of publication bias. No significant change in SICI and ICF was observed, with exception to decrease in SICI with cTBS at the early time point (SMD=0.42, P=0.00036). The results also highlight several factors contributing to TBS efficacy, including the number of pulses, frequency of stimulation and BDNF polymorphisms. Further research investigating optimal TBS stimulation parameters, particularly for iTBS, is needed in order for these paradigms to be successfully translated into clinical settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sung Wook Chung
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Aron T Hill
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Nigel C Rogasch
- Brain and Mental Health Laboratory, School of Psychological Sciences and Monash Biomedical Imaging, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Kate E Hoy
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Paul B Fitzgerald
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wischnewski M, Schutter DJLG. Efficacy and Time Course of Theta Burst Stimulation in Healthy Humans. Brain Stimul 2015; 8:685-92. [PMID: 26014214 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2015.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 180] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2014] [Revised: 03/12/2015] [Accepted: 03/20/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the past decade research has shown that continuous (cTBS) and intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) alter neuronal excitability levels in the primary motor cortex. OBJECTIVE Quantitatively review the magnitude and time course on cortical excitability of cTBS and iTBS. METHODS Sixty-four TBS studies published between January 2005 and October 2014 were retrieved from the scientific search engine PubMED and included for analyses. The main inclusion criteria involved stimulation of the primary motor cortex in healthy volunteers with no motor practice prior to intervention and motor evoked potentials as primary outcome measure. RESULTS ITBS applied for 190 s significantly increases cortical excitability up to 60 min with a mean maximum potentiation of 35.54 ± 3.32%. CTBS applied for 40 s decreases cortical excitability up to 50 min with a mean maximum depression of -22.81 ± 2.86%, while cTBS applied for 20 s decreases cortical excitability (mean maximum -27.84 ± 4.15%) for 20 min. CONCLUSION The present findings offer normative insights into the magnitude and time course of TBS-induced changes in cortical excitability levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miles Wischnewski
- Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - Dennis J L G Schutter
- Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|