Determining the cortical target of transcranial magnetic stimulation

被引:23
作者
Thielscher, A. [1 ]
Wichmann, F. A. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Max Planck Inst Biol Cybernet, High Field Magnet Resonance Ctr, D-72076 Tubingen, Germany
[2] Tech Univ Berlin, Sekr FR6 4, FG Modellierung Kognitiver Prozesse, D-1000 Berlin, Germany
[3] Bernstein Ctr Computat Neurosci Berlin, Berlin, Germany
关键词
MOTOR CORTEX; PSYCHOMETRIC FUNCTION; BRAIN-STIMULATION; COIL STIMULATION; ELECTRIC-FIELD; VISUAL-CORTEX; MODEL; ANISOTROPY; AREAS; SITE;
D O I
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.04.021
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Determining the cortical region that is effectively targeted by TMS to induce a reproducible behavioral effect is a non-trivial problem. In mapping experiments, a grid of coil positions is used to systematically assess the TMS effect on, e.g. muscle responses or error rates. The center-of-mass (CoM) of the response distribution is projected onto the cortex to determine the likely target site, implicitly assuming the existence of a single, contiguous target. The mapping results, however, often contain several local maxima. These could either stem from measurement noise, or hint towards a distributed target region. Critically, the calculation of a CoM, by design, treats multiple maxima as if they were noise. Here, a stringent hierarchical sigmoidal model fitting approach is developed that determines the cortical target(s) from TMS mapping based on electric field calculations. Monte-Carlo simulations are used to assess the significance and the goodness-of-fit of the sigmoidal fits, and to obtain confidence regions around the calculated tat-gets. The approach was applied to mapping data on visual suppression (N=7). In all subjects, we reliably identified two or three neighboring targets commonly contributing to the suppression effect (average distance +/- SD: 7.7 +/- 2.3 mm). This demonstrates that (i) the assumption of a single CoM is not generally valid and (ii) the combination of TMS mapping with the fitting approach has a cortical resolution of <1 cm. The estimates for the field strength necessary to achieve 50% of the maximal suppression effect vary noticeably across subjects (mean +/- SD: 139 +/- 24 V/m), indicating inter-individual differences in the susceptibility to TMS. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1319 / 1330
页数:12
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]   MODELING OF MAGNETIC-FIELD STIMULATION OF BENT NEURONS [J].
ABDEEN, MA ;
STUCHLY, MA .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 1994, 41 (11) :1092-1095
[2]   MODELING MAGNETIC COIL EXCITATION OF HUMAN CEREBRAL-CORTEX WITH A PERIPHERAL-NERVE IMMERSED IN A BRAIN-SHAPED VOLUME CONDUCTOR - THE SIGNIFICANCE OF FIBER BENDING IN EXCITATION [J].
AMASSIAN, VE ;
EBERLE, L ;
MACCABEE, PJ ;
CRACCO, RQ .
ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY AND CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1992, 85 (05) :291-301
[3]   SUPPRESSION OF VISUAL-PERCEPTION BY MAGNETIC COIL STIMULATION OF HUMAN OCCIPITAL CORTEX [J].
AMASSIAN, VE ;
CRACCO, RQ ;
MACCABEE, PJ ;
CRACCO, JB ;
RUDELL, A ;
EBERLE, L .
ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY AND CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1989, 74 (06) :458-462
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2002, MODELLING BINARY DAT, DOI DOI 10.1201/B16654
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1998, NEURAL NETWORKS COMP
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2018, Generalized linear models
[7]   Deconvolution of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) maps [J].
Bohning, DE ;
He, L ;
George, MS ;
Epstein, CM .
JOURNAL OF NEURAL TRANSMISSION, 2001, 108 (01) :35-52
[8]   Multimodal output mapping of human central motor representation on different spatial scales [J].
Classen, J ;
Knorr, U ;
Werhahn, KJ ;
Schlaug, G ;
Kunesch, E ;
Cohen, LG ;
Seitz, RJ ;
Benecke, R .
JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON, 1998, 512 (01) :163-179
[9]   The Ferrier Lecture 2004 - What can transcranial magnetic stimulation tell us about how the brain works? [J].
Cowey, A .
PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2005, 360 (1458) :1185-1205
[10]   Diffusion tensor MRI-based estimation of the influence of brain tissue anisotropy on the effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation [J].
De Lucia, M. ;
Parker, G. J. M. ;
Embleton, K. ;
Newton, J. M. ;
Walsh, V. .
NEUROIMAGE, 2007, 36 (04) :1159-1170