Point Of View: Motor-Evoked Potentials Elicited From Human Erector Spinae Muscles by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Spine ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Yamada
2020 ◽  
Vol 129 (6) ◽  
pp. 1393-1404
Author(s):  
Joseph F. Welch ◽  
Patrick J. Argento ◽  
Gordon S. Mitchell ◽  
Emily J. Fox

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a noninvasive technique to assess neural impulse conduction along the cortico-diaphragmatic pathway. The reliability of diaphragm motor-evoked potentials (MEP) induced by TMS is unknown. Notwithstanding large variability in MEP amplitude, we found good-to-excellent reproducibility of all MEP characteristics (latency, duration, amplitude, and area) both within- and between-day in healthy adult men and women. Our findings support the use of TMS and surface EMG to assess diaphragm activation in humans.


NeuroImage ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 1805-1817 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.F.W. Neggers ◽  
T.R. Langerak ◽  
D.J.L.G. Schutter ◽  
R.C.W. Mandl ◽  
N.F. Ramsey ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Mikaël Desmons ◽  
Antoine Rohel ◽  
Amélie Desgagnés ◽  
Catherine Mercier ◽  
Hugo Massé-Alarie

Different directions of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can activate different neuronal circuits. While posteroanterior current (PA-TMS) depolarizes mainly interneurons in primary motor cortex (M1), an anteroposterior current (AP-TMS) has been suggested to activate different M1 circuits and perhaps axons from the premotor regions. Although M1 is also involved in the control of axial muscles, no study has explored if different current directions activate different M1 circuits that may have distinct functional role. The aim of the study was to compare the effect of different current directions (PA- and AP-TMS) on the corticomotor control and spatial cortical organisation of the lumbar erector spinae muscle (LES). Thirthy-four healthy participants were recruited for two independent experiments and LES motor-evoked potentials (MEP) were recorded. In experiment 1 (n=17), active motor threshold (AMT), MEP latencies, recruitment curve (90 to 160% AMT), excitatory and inhibitory intracortical mechanisms using paired-pulse TMS (80% followed by 120% AMT stimuli at 2-3-10 and 15ms inter-stimulus intervals) were tested using a double cone (n=12) and a figure-of-eight (n=5) coils. In experiment 2 (n=17), LES cortical representations were tested using PA- and AP-TMS. AMT was higher for AP- compared to PA-TMS (p=0.002). Longer latencies with AP-TMS were compared to PA-TMS (p=0.017). AP-TMS produced more inhibition compared to PA-TMS at 2ms and 3ms (p=0.010), but no difference was observed for longer intervals. No difference was found for recruitment curve and mapping. Those findings suggest that each PA- and AP-TMS may activate different cortical circuits controlling low back muscles as proposed for hand muscles.


Nosotchu ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 601-604
Author(s):  
Hitoshi Morimitsu ◽  
Akira Oukura ◽  
Takashi Tokutomi ◽  
Houtetsu Shimamoto ◽  
Minoru Shigemori

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document