Cargando…

Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris

BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a widely-used investigative technique in motor cortical evaluation. Recently, there has been a surge in TMS studies evaluating lower-limb fatigue. TMS intensity of 120-130% resting motor threshold (RMT) and 120% active motor threshold (AMT) and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Temesi, John, Gruet, Mathieu, Rupp, Thomas, Verges, Samuel, Millet, Guillaume Y
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3976163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24655366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-40
_version_ 1782310249475080192
author Temesi, John
Gruet, Mathieu
Rupp, Thomas
Verges, Samuel
Millet, Guillaume Y
author_facet Temesi, John
Gruet, Mathieu
Rupp, Thomas
Verges, Samuel
Millet, Guillaume Y
author_sort Temesi, John
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a widely-used investigative technique in motor cortical evaluation. Recently, there has been a surge in TMS studies evaluating lower-limb fatigue. TMS intensity of 120-130% resting motor threshold (RMT) and 120% active motor threshold (AMT) and TMS intensity determined using stimulus–response curves during muscular contraction have been used in these studies. With the expansion of fatigue research in locomotion, the quadriceps femoris is increasingly of interest. It is important to select a stimulus intensity appropriate to evaluate the variables, including voluntary activation, being measured in this functionally important muscle group. This study assessed whether selected quadriceps TMS stimulus intensity determined by frequently employed methods is similar between methods and muscles. METHODS: Stimulus intensity in vastus lateralis, rectus femoris and vastus medialis muscles was determined by RMT, AMT (i.e. during brief voluntary contractions at 10% maximal voluntary force, MVC) and maximal motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude from stimulus–response curves during brief voluntary contractions at 10, 20 and 50% MVC at different stimulus intensities. RESULTS: Stimulus intensity determined from a 10% MVC stimulus–response curve and at 120 and 130% RMT was higher than stimulus intensity at 120% AMT (lowest) and from a 50% MVC stimulus–response curve (p < 0.05). Stimulus intensity from a 20% MVC stimulus–response curve was similar to 120% RMT and 50% MVC stimulus–response curve. Mean stimulus intensity for stimulus–response curves at 10, 20 and 50% MVC corresponded to approximately 135, 115 and 100% RMT and 180, 155 and 130% AMT, respectively. Selected stimulus intensity was similar between muscles for all methods (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Similar optimal stimulus intensity and maximal MEP amplitudes at 20 and 50% MVC and the minimal risk of residual fatigue at 20% MVC suggest that a 20% MVC stimulus–response curve is appropriate for determining TMS stimulus intensity in the quadriceps femoris. The higher selected stimulus intensities at 120-130% RMT have the potential to cause increased coactivation and discomfort and the lower stimulus intensity at 120% AMT may underestimate evoked responses. One muscle may also act as a surrogate in determining optimal quadriceps femoris stimulation intensity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3976163
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39761632014-04-18 Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris Temesi, John Gruet, Mathieu Rupp, Thomas Verges, Samuel Millet, Guillaume Y J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a widely-used investigative technique in motor cortical evaluation. Recently, there has been a surge in TMS studies evaluating lower-limb fatigue. TMS intensity of 120-130% resting motor threshold (RMT) and 120% active motor threshold (AMT) and TMS intensity determined using stimulus–response curves during muscular contraction have been used in these studies. With the expansion of fatigue research in locomotion, the quadriceps femoris is increasingly of interest. It is important to select a stimulus intensity appropriate to evaluate the variables, including voluntary activation, being measured in this functionally important muscle group. This study assessed whether selected quadriceps TMS stimulus intensity determined by frequently employed methods is similar between methods and muscles. METHODS: Stimulus intensity in vastus lateralis, rectus femoris and vastus medialis muscles was determined by RMT, AMT (i.e. during brief voluntary contractions at 10% maximal voluntary force, MVC) and maximal motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude from stimulus–response curves during brief voluntary contractions at 10, 20 and 50% MVC at different stimulus intensities. RESULTS: Stimulus intensity determined from a 10% MVC stimulus–response curve and at 120 and 130% RMT was higher than stimulus intensity at 120% AMT (lowest) and from a 50% MVC stimulus–response curve (p < 0.05). Stimulus intensity from a 20% MVC stimulus–response curve was similar to 120% RMT and 50% MVC stimulus–response curve. Mean stimulus intensity for stimulus–response curves at 10, 20 and 50% MVC corresponded to approximately 135, 115 and 100% RMT and 180, 155 and 130% AMT, respectively. Selected stimulus intensity was similar between muscles for all methods (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Similar optimal stimulus intensity and maximal MEP amplitudes at 20 and 50% MVC and the minimal risk of residual fatigue at 20% MVC suggest that a 20% MVC stimulus–response curve is appropriate for determining TMS stimulus intensity in the quadriceps femoris. The higher selected stimulus intensities at 120-130% RMT have the potential to cause increased coactivation and discomfort and the lower stimulus intensity at 120% AMT may underestimate evoked responses. One muscle may also act as a surrogate in determining optimal quadriceps femoris stimulation intensity. BioMed Central 2014-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3976163/ /pubmed/24655366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-40 Text en Copyright © 2014 Temesi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Temesi, John
Gruet, Mathieu
Rupp, Thomas
Verges, Samuel
Millet, Guillaume Y
Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
title Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
title_full Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
title_fullStr Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
title_full_unstemmed Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
title_short Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
title_sort resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus–response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3976163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24655366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-40
work_keys_str_mv AT temesijohn restingandactivemotorthresholdsversusstimulusresponsecurvestodeterminetranscranialmagneticstimulationintensityinquadricepsfemoris
AT gruetmathieu restingandactivemotorthresholdsversusstimulusresponsecurvestodeterminetranscranialmagneticstimulationintensityinquadricepsfemoris
AT ruppthomas restingandactivemotorthresholdsversusstimulusresponsecurvestodeterminetranscranialmagneticstimulationintensityinquadricepsfemoris
AT vergessamuel restingandactivemotorthresholdsversusstimulusresponsecurvestodeterminetranscranialmagneticstimulationintensityinquadricepsfemoris
AT milletguillaumey restingandactivemotorthresholdsversusstimulusresponsecurvestodeterminetranscranialmagneticstimulationintensityinquadricepsfemoris