Cargando…

Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()

BACKGROUND: While transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coil geometry has important effects on the evoked magnetic field, no study has systematically examined how different coil designs affect the effectiveness of cerebellar stimulation. HYPOTHESIS: The depth of the cerebellar targets will limit e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hardwick, Robert M., Lesage, Elise, Miall, R. Chris
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4180011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24924734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2014.04.009
_version_ 1782337168047341568
author Hardwick, Robert M.
Lesage, Elise
Miall, R. Chris
author_facet Hardwick, Robert M.
Lesage, Elise
Miall, R. Chris
author_sort Hardwick, Robert M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: While transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coil geometry has important effects on the evoked magnetic field, no study has systematically examined how different coil designs affect the effectiveness of cerebellar stimulation. HYPOTHESIS: The depth of the cerebellar targets will limit efficiency. Angled coils designed to stimulate deeper tissue are more effective in eliciting cerebellar stimulation. METHODS: Experiment 1 examined basic input–output properties of the figure-of-eight, batwing and double-cone coils, assessed with stimulation of motor cortex. Experiment 2 assessed the ability of each coil to activate cerebellum, using cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI). Experiment 3 mapped distances from the scalp to cerebellar and motor cortical targets in a sample of 100 subjects' structural magnetic resonance images. RESULTS: Experiment 1 showed batwing and double-cone coils have significantly lower resting motor thresholds, and recruitment curves with steeper slopes than the figure-of-eight coil. Experiment 2 showed the double-cone coil was the most efficient for eliciting CBI. The batwing coil induced CBI only at higher stimulus intensities. The figure-of-eight coil did not elicit reliable CBI. Experiment 3 confirmed that cerebellar tissue is significantly deeper than primary motor cortex tissue, and we provide a map of scalp-to-target distances. CONCLUSIONS: The double-cone and batwing coils designed to stimulate deeper tissue can effectively stimulate cerebellar targets. The double-cone coil was found to be most effective. The depth map provides a guide to the accessible regions of the cerebellar volume. These results can guide coil selection and stimulation parameters when designing cerebellar TMS studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4180011
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41800112014-10-02 Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth() Hardwick, Robert M. Lesage, Elise Miall, R. Chris Brain Stimul Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) BACKGROUND: While transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coil geometry has important effects on the evoked magnetic field, no study has systematically examined how different coil designs affect the effectiveness of cerebellar stimulation. HYPOTHESIS: The depth of the cerebellar targets will limit efficiency. Angled coils designed to stimulate deeper tissue are more effective in eliciting cerebellar stimulation. METHODS: Experiment 1 examined basic input–output properties of the figure-of-eight, batwing and double-cone coils, assessed with stimulation of motor cortex. Experiment 2 assessed the ability of each coil to activate cerebellum, using cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI). Experiment 3 mapped distances from the scalp to cerebellar and motor cortical targets in a sample of 100 subjects' structural magnetic resonance images. RESULTS: Experiment 1 showed batwing and double-cone coils have significantly lower resting motor thresholds, and recruitment curves with steeper slopes than the figure-of-eight coil. Experiment 2 showed the double-cone coil was the most efficient for eliciting CBI. The batwing coil induced CBI only at higher stimulus intensities. The figure-of-eight coil did not elicit reliable CBI. Experiment 3 confirmed that cerebellar tissue is significantly deeper than primary motor cortex tissue, and we provide a map of scalp-to-target distances. CONCLUSIONS: The double-cone and batwing coils designed to stimulate deeper tissue can effectively stimulate cerebellar targets. The double-cone coil was found to be most effective. The depth map provides a guide to the accessible regions of the cerebellar volume. These results can guide coil selection and stimulation parameters when designing cerebellar TMS studies. Elsevier 2014-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4180011/ /pubmed/24924734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2014.04.009 Text en © 2014 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) .
spellingShingle Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)
Hardwick, Robert M.
Lesage, Elise
Miall, R. Chris
Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()
title Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()
title_full Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()
title_fullStr Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()
title_full_unstemmed Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()
title_short Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: The Role of Coil Geometry and Tissue Depth()
title_sort cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation: the role of coil geometry and tissue depth()
topic Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4180011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24924734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2014.04.009
work_keys_str_mv AT hardwickrobertm cerebellartranscranialmagneticstimulationtheroleofcoilgeometryandtissuedepth
AT lesageelise cerebellartranscranialmagneticstimulationtheroleofcoilgeometryandtissuedepth
AT miallrchris cerebellartranscranialmagneticstimulationtheroleofcoilgeometryandtissuedepth