21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Transcranial magnetic stimulation in basic and clinical neuroscience: A comprehensive review of fundamental principles and novel insights

      , , , ,
      Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references176

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          NON-INVASIVE MAGNETIC STIMULATION OF HUMAN MOTOR CORTEX

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Safety aspects of transcranial direct current stimulation concerning healthy subjects and patients.

            Cortical excitability changes induced by tDCS and revealed by TMS, are increasingly being used as an index of neuronal plasticity in the human cortex. The aim of this paper is to summarize the partially adverse effects of 567 tDCS sessions over motor and non-motor cortical areas (occipital, temporal, parietal) from the last 2 years, on work performed in our laboratories. One-hundred and two of our subjects who participated in our tDCS studies completed a questionnaire. The questionnaire contained rating scales regarding the presence and severity of headache, difficulties in concentrating, acute mood changes, visual perceptual changes and any discomforting sensation like pain, tingling, itching or burning under the electrodes, during and after tDCS. Participants were healthy subjects (75.5%), migraine patients (8.8%), post-stroke patients (5.9%) and tinnitus patients (9.8%). During tDCS a mild tingling sensation was the most common reported adverse effect (70.6%), moderate fatigue was felt by 35.3% of the subjects, whereas a light itching sensation under the stimulation electrodes occurred in 30.4% of cases. After tDCS headache (11.8%), nausea (2.9%) and insomnia (0.98%) were reported, but fairly infrequently. In addition, the incidence of the itching sensation (p=0.02) and the intensity of tingling sensation (p=0.02) were significantly higher during tDCS in the group of the healthy subjects, in comparison to patients; whereas the occurrence of headache was significantly higher in the patient group (p=0.03) after the stimulation. Our results suggest that tDCS applied to motor and non-motor areas according to the present tDCS safety guidelines, is associated with relatively minor adverse effects in healthy humans and patients with varying neurological disorders.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Responses to rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human motor cortex.

              We applied trains of focal, rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to the motor cortex of 14 healthy volunteers with recording of the EMG from the contralateral abductor pollicis brevis, extensor carpi radialis, biceps brachii and deltoid muscles. Modulation of the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) produced in the target muscle during rTMS showed a pattern of inhibitory and excitatory effects which depended on the rTMS frequency and intensity. With the magnetic coil situated over the optimal scalp position for activating the abductor pollicis brevis, rTMS led to spread of excitation, as evident from the induction of progressively larger MEPs in the other muscles. The number of pulses inducing this spread of excitation decreased with increasing rTMS frequency and intensity. Latency of the MEPs produced in the other muscles during the spread of excitation was significantly longer than that produced by single-pulse TMS applied to the optimal scalp positions for their activation. The difference in MEP latency could be explained by a delay in intracortical conduction along myelinated cortico-cortical pathways. Following rTMS, a 3-4 min period of increased excitability was demonstrated by an increase in the amplitude of MEPs produced in the target muscles by single-pulse TMS. Nevertheless, repeated rTMS trains applied 1 min apart led to similar modulation of the responses and to spread of excitation after approximately the same number of pulses. This suggests that the spread might be due to the breakdown of inhibitory connections or the recruitment of excitatory pathways, whereas the post-stimulation facilitation may be due to a transient increase in the efficacy of excitatory synapses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
                Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
                Elsevier BV
                01497634
                December 2017
                December 2017
                : 83
                :
                : 381-404
                Article
                10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.10.006
                29032089
                0651c2fa-a7dd-491d-9970-69e998a9cbd1
                © 2017
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article