Cargando…

MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus

Langguth et al. (2006) described a method for targeting primary auditory cortex (PAC) during transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) using the 10–20 electroencephalography system. Study aims were to measure the degree of accuracy in placing the TMS coil on the scalp overlying PAC using the 10–20 met...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Theodoroff, Sarah M., Stevens, Alexander A., McMillan, Garnett, Pettersson, David R., Woodward, William, Folmer, Robert L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5999188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29464519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10548-018-0636-9
_version_ 1783331382015033344
author Theodoroff, Sarah M.
Stevens, Alexander A.
McMillan, Garnett
Pettersson, David R.
Woodward, William
Folmer, Robert L.
author_facet Theodoroff, Sarah M.
Stevens, Alexander A.
McMillan, Garnett
Pettersson, David R.
Woodward, William
Folmer, Robert L.
author_sort Theodoroff, Sarah M.
collection PubMed
description Langguth et al. (2006) described a method for targeting primary auditory cortex (PAC) during transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) using the 10–20 electroencephalography system. Study aims were to measure the degree of accuracy in placing the TMS coil on the scalp overlying PAC using the 10–20 method and determine the extent to which accuracy depends on the hemisphere of the coil placement. Twelve participants underwent anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of their head in a 3T scanner. Before imaging, a fiducial marker was placed on their scalp corresponding to the TMS coil position. MRI scans were analyzed to determine the distance from the fiducial marker to PAC for each participant. On average, the 10–20 method resulted in distances in the medial–lateral, anterior-posterior, and inferior-superior dimensions that were within a few millimeters (~ 4 mm) of each other between the left and right hemispheres. The fiducial marker was, on average, 10.4 mm superior and 10.8 mm posterior to the optimal scalp location that minimized the distance to PAC. Individual asymmetries and other systematic differences found in this study raise important considerations to keep in mind that might necessitate using an MRI-guided method of coil-positioning when targeting PAC for TMS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5999188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59991882018-06-28 MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus Theodoroff, Sarah M. Stevens, Alexander A. McMillan, Garnett Pettersson, David R. Woodward, William Folmer, Robert L. Brain Topogr Original Paper Langguth et al. (2006) described a method for targeting primary auditory cortex (PAC) during transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) using the 10–20 electroencephalography system. Study aims were to measure the degree of accuracy in placing the TMS coil on the scalp overlying PAC using the 10–20 method and determine the extent to which accuracy depends on the hemisphere of the coil placement. Twelve participants underwent anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of their head in a 3T scanner. Before imaging, a fiducial marker was placed on their scalp corresponding to the TMS coil position. MRI scans were analyzed to determine the distance from the fiducial marker to PAC for each participant. On average, the 10–20 method resulted in distances in the medial–lateral, anterior-posterior, and inferior-superior dimensions that were within a few millimeters (~ 4 mm) of each other between the left and right hemispheres. The fiducial marker was, on average, 10.4 mm superior and 10.8 mm posterior to the optimal scalp location that minimized the distance to PAC. Individual asymmetries and other systematic differences found in this study raise important considerations to keep in mind that might necessitate using an MRI-guided method of coil-positioning when targeting PAC for TMS. Springer US 2018-02-21 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5999188/ /pubmed/29464519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10548-018-0636-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Theodoroff, Sarah M.
Stevens, Alexander A.
McMillan, Garnett
Pettersson, David R.
Woodward, William
Folmer, Robert L.
MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus
title MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus
title_full MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus
title_fullStr MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus
title_full_unstemmed MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus
title_short MRI Verification of a 10–20 Targeting Protocol Used During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sessions for Tinnitus
title_sort mri verification of a 10–20 targeting protocol used during transcranial magnetic stimulation sessions for tinnitus
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5999188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29464519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10548-018-0636-9
work_keys_str_mv AT theodoroffsarahm mriverificationofa1020targetingprotocolusedduringtranscranialmagneticstimulationsessionsfortinnitus
AT stevensalexandera mriverificationofa1020targetingprotocolusedduringtranscranialmagneticstimulationsessionsfortinnitus
AT mcmillangarnett mriverificationofa1020targetingprotocolusedduringtranscranialmagneticstimulationsessionsfortinnitus
AT petterssondavidr mriverificationofa1020targetingprotocolusedduringtranscranialmagneticstimulationsessionsfortinnitus
AT woodwardwilliam mriverificationofa1020targetingprotocolusedduringtranscranialmagneticstimulationsessionsfortinnitus
AT folmerrobertl mriverificationofa1020targetingprotocolusedduringtranscranialmagneticstimulationsessionsfortinnitus