P122 Contribution of integrated somatosensory and auditory inputs to the cortical response evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation: A sham TMS-EEG study
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can effectively stimulate non-invasively the human cortex. The TMS-evoked cortical response can be recorded with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also stimulates our senses by stimulating peripheral trigeminal nerve fibers and creating a loud click....
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical neurophysiology Jg. 128; H. 3; S. e75 - e76 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Elsevier B.V
01.03.2017
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| ISSN: | 1388-2457, 1872-8952 |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Abstract | Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can effectively stimulate non-invasively the human cortex. The TMS-evoked cortical response can be recorded with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also stimulates our senses by stimulating peripheral trigeminal nerve fibers and creating a loud click. This implies that the TMS-evoked EEG response not only reflects neural activity induced by transcranial excitations of neurons but also neural activity due to somatosensory and auditory stimulation. To characterize the contribution of multisensory peripheral stimulation to TMS-evoked cortical potentials (TEPs), we recorded the evoked EEG response caused by a somato-auditory sham condition which mimicked real TMS. In 20 healthy individuals, TMS was delivered with a figure-of-eight coil over two target sites (posterior parietal cortex and superior frontal gyrus) using two different coil orientations, perpendicular or parallel to sulcus orientation. The sham condition comprised of simultaneous somatosensory and auditory stimulation over the same hotspots as for real TMS. Somatosensory stimulation was achieved via cutaneous electrical stimulation of the scalp, while the TMS coil was used for auditory stimulation ensuring no electric field was induced in the brain by physically separating the coil from the scalp. EEG was acquired with a 61-channel TMS-compatible EEG system. While the early cortical potentials evoked by real or sham TMS differed, TEPs were closely matched in terms of shape and spatial distribution for late components of the evoked EEG responses 70–200ms after the TMS pulse (see Fig. 1 [Display omitted] ). This was also the case for the N100 which has been commonly attributed to TMS-induced cortical inhibition. The resemblance of the EEG responses evoked by real and sham TMS challenges the notion that TEPs are mainly reflecting transcranial excitation of cortical neurons. This work has been funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation Interdisciplinary Synergy Program 2014 [“Biophysically adjusted state-informed cortex stimulation (BASICS); Grant No. NNF14OC0011413]. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can effectively stimulate non-invasively the human cortex. The TMS-evoked cortical response can be recorded with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also stimulates our senses by stimulating peripheral trigeminal nerve fibers and creating a loud click. This implies that the TMS-evoked EEG response not only reflects neural activity induced by transcranial excitations of neurons but also neural activity due to somatosensory and auditory stimulation. To characterize the contribution of multisensory peripheral stimulation to TMS-evoked cortical potentials (TEPs), we recorded the evoked EEG response caused by a somato-auditory sham condition which mimicked real TMS. In 20 healthy individuals, TMS was delivered with a figure-of-eight coil over two target sites (posterior parietal cortex and superior frontal gyrus) using two different coil orientations, perpendicular or parallel to sulcus orientation. The sham condition comprised of simultaneous somatosensory and auditory stimulation over the same hotspots as for real TMS. Somatosensory stimulation was achieved via cutaneous electrical stimulation of the scalp, while the TMS coil was used for auditory stimulation ensuring no electric field was induced in the brain by physically separating the coil from the scalp. EEG was acquired with a 61-channel TMS-compatible EEG system. While the early cortical potentials evoked by real or sham TMS differed, TEPs were closely matched in terms of shape and spatial distribution for late components of the evoked EEG responses 70–200ms after the TMS pulse (see Fig. 1 [Display omitted] ). This was also the case for the N100 which has been commonly attributed to TMS-induced cortical inhibition. The resemblance of the EEG responses evoked by real and sham TMS challenges the notion that TEPs are mainly reflecting transcranial excitation of cortical neurons. This work has been funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation Interdisciplinary Synergy Program 2014 [“Biophysically adjusted state-informed cortex stimulation (BASICS); Grant No. NNF14OC0011413]. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can effectively stimulate non-invasively the human cortex. The TMS-evoked cortical response can be recorded with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also stimulates our senses by stimulating peripheral trigeminal nerve fibers and creating a loud click. This implies that the TMS-evoked EEG response not only reflects neural activity induced by transcranial excitations of neurons but also neural activity due to somatosensory and auditory stimulation. To characterize the contribution of multisensory peripheral stimulation to TMS-evoked cortical potentials (TEPs), we recorded the evoked EEG response caused by a somato-auditory sham condition which mimicked real TMS. In 20 healthy individuals, TMS was delivered with a figure-of-eight coil over two target sites (posterior parietal cortex and superior frontal gyrus) using two different coil orientations, perpendicular or parallel to sulcus orientation. The sham condition comprised of simultaneous somatosensory and auditory stimulation over the same hotspots as for real TMS. Somatosensory stimulation was achieved via cutaneous electrical stimulation of the scalp, while the TMS coil was used for auditory stimulation ensuring no electric field was induced in the brain by physically separating the coil from the scalp. EEG was acquired with a 61-channel TMS-compatible EEG system. While the early cortical potentials evoked by real or sham TMS differed, TEPs were closely matched in terms of shape and spatial distribution for late components of the evoked EEG responses 70–200 ms after the TMS pulse (see Fig. 1 ). This was also the case for the N100 which has been commonly attributed to TMS-induced cortical inhibition. The resemblance of the EEG responses evoked by real and sham TMS challenges the notion that TEPs are mainly reflecting transcranial excitation of cortical neurons. This work has been funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation Interdisciplinary Synergy Program 2014 [“Biophysically adjusted state-informed cortex stimulation (BASICS); Grant No. NNF14OC0011413]. |
| Author | Siebner, H.R. Stanek, K. Bergmann, T.O. Tomasevic, L. Conde, V. Akopian, I. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: V. surname: Conde fullname: Conde, V. – sequence: 2 givenname: I. surname: Akopian fullname: Akopian, I. – sequence: 3 givenname: L. surname: Tomasevic fullname: Tomasevic, L. – sequence: 4 givenname: K. surname: Stanek fullname: Stanek, K. – sequence: 5 givenname: T.O. surname: Bergmann fullname: Bergmann, T.O. – sequence: 6 givenname: H.R. surname: Siebner fullname: Siebner, H.R. |
| BookMark | eNqVUdtqGzEQFSWFJmn-oA_6gXVH2ptcSiEYJy2kJJDkWWil2ViOVzKSNrD_0o-thPtaSl80mts5M2cuyJnzDgn5xGDFgHWf9yt9sO64W_Hs5dCKN807cs5EzyuxbvlZ_tdCVLxp-w_kIsY9APTQ8HPy64FxTjfepWCHOVnvqB-pdQlfgkpoaPSTSj6iiz4sVDlD1WxsKk6mnFOkydO0Q6p9SFarAw0Yj95FpPjmXzPCsNAUlIs6PzbnJ_XiMJfSmOw0H1Qh_UKvadypiT79fKy229ucm83ykbwf1SHi1R97SZ5vtk-b79Xd_e2PzfVdpTmIpmqh7mAQQ99pU0Pd90KNnIEZgZsRlVrD0Kx7I9a80wMa3rY170SnGEI_snGsL0lzwtXBxxhwlMdgJxUWyUAWheVenhSWReESzQrntm-nNsyzvVkMMmqLTqOxAXWSxtv_BShFRcRXXDDu_Rxc3lsyGbkE-ViOWG7IuhoEhzoDfP07wL_5fwN6ALSz |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2016 |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2016 |
| DBID | AAYXX CITATION |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.244 |
| DatabaseName | CrossRef |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef |
| DatabaseTitleList | |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1872-8952 |
| EndPage | e76 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 10_1016_j_clinph_2016_10_244 S1388245716308203 1_s2_0_S1388245716308203 |
| GroupedDBID | --- --K --M -~X .1- .55 .FO .GJ .~1 0R~ 1B1 1P~ 1RT 1~. 1~5 29B 4.4 457 4G. 53G 5GY 5RE 5VS 6J9 7-5 71M 8P~ AABNK AAEDT AAEDW AAIKJ AAKOC AALRI AAOAW AAQFI AAQXK AATTM AAXKI AAXLA AAXUO AAYWO ABBQC ABCQJ ABFNM ABFRF ABIVO ABJNI ABLJU ABMAC ABMZM ABTEW ABWVN ABXDB ACDAQ ACGFO ACIEU ACIUM ACLOT ACRLP ACRPL ACVFH ADBBV ADCNI ADEZE ADMUD ADNMO ADVLN AEBSH AEFWE AEIPS AEKER AENEX AEUPX AEVXI AFJKZ AFPUW AFRHN AFTJW AFXIZ AGHFR AGQPQ AGUBO AGWIK AGYEJ AI. AIEXJ AIGII AIIUN AIKHN AITUG AJRQY AJUYK AKBMS AKRWK AKYEP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMRAJ ANKPU ANZVX APXCP ASPBG AVWKF AXJTR AZFZN BKOJK BLXMC BNPGV CS3 DU5 EBS EFJIC EFKBS EFLBG EJD EO8 EO9 EP2 EP3 F5P FDB FEDTE FGOYB FIRID FNPLU FYGXN G-Q GBLVA HVGLF HX~ HZ~ IHE J1W K-O KOM L7B M41 MO0 MOBAO MVM N9A O-L O9- OAUVE OHT OP~ OZT P-8 P-9 P2P PC. Q38 R2- ROL RPZ SCC SDF SDG SDP SEL SES SEW SPCBC SSH SSN SSZ T5K UAP UNMZH UV1 VH1 X7M XOL XPP Z5R ZGI ~G- ~HD AGCQF AACTN AADPK AAIAV ABLVK ABYKQ AFCTW AFKWA AFMIJ AHPSJ AJBFU AJOXV AMFUW LCYCR RIG VQA ZA5 9DU AAYXX CITATION |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c2084-50360b8b76cd303778af210df02dfeaa90b497d8926cbed25532686a1e07f1ff3 |
| ISSN | 1388-2457 |
| IngestDate | Sat Nov 29 06:59:02 EST 2025 Fri Feb 23 02:12:25 EST 2024 Sat Aug 23 01:30:49 EDT 2025 Tue Oct 14 19:30:16 EDT 2025 |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 3 |
| Language | English |
| LinkModel | OpenURL |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c2084-50360b8b76cd303778af210df02dfeaa90b497d8926cbed25532686a1e07f1ff3 |
| ParticipantIDs | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_clinph_2016_10_244 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_clinph_2016_10_244 elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S1388245716308203 elsevier_clinicalkey_doi_10_1016_j_clinph_2016_10_244 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | March 2017 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2017-03-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 03 year: 2017 text: March 2017 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationTitle | Clinical neurophysiology |
| PublicationYear | 2017 |
| Publisher | Elsevier B.V |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Elsevier B.V |
| SSID | ssj0007042 |
| Score | 2.1966546 |
| Snippet | Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can effectively stimulate non-invasively the human cortex. The TMS-evoked cortical response can be recorded with... |
| SourceID | crossref elsevier |
| SourceType | Index Database Publisher |
| StartPage | e75 |
| SubjectTerms | Neurology |
| Title | P122 Contribution of integrated somatosensory and auditory inputs to the cortical response evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation: A sham TMS-EEG study |
| URI | https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S1388245716308203 https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S1388245716308203 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.244 |
| Volume | 128 |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Elsevier SD Freedom Collection Journals 2021 customDbUrl: eissn: 1872-8952 dateEnd: 20171231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0007042 issn: 1388-2457 databaseCode: AIEXJ dateStart: 19990101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9NAEF6FFiEuiKcoBTQHbpEje_3YdW9RZd6tKjWg3Cw_1pCG2FGcRuW_8Mv4Ncx6dx1bKSogcbGSlTdee77MfjOeByGvkIM6buZ4llvIFmYOY1bCc24FReInnk8Fb7oofP7ITk_5dBqeDQY_TS7M5hsrS351FS7_q6hxDIUtU2f_Qtztj-IAfkah4xHFjsc_EvyZQ6lM5GtbWfWqQkgvOZLUqkbzVb5eb2q1yswM-WVWLi_XtaGjaJcqR_dKxdGKodhUc81Y5RaX4UE63BfJl1LmQg5RXSx0OzCV8V5_TRbDycm5FUVvOpVsTWUEk5XZFNVsfCw9Jz_eRN4PxB3Pq-VMuWxbb-9ERjjh9p5tcygS1R1ZzLd-XO3YwM2yjezSutiVkvVU_epWWVPeQaXbUb1CdWDRu7hQXWV2Ngjlq7gYybzTpXwZ5QQjGQ6vilD263FHxx8cq6Yj2zqXa5FLQfYqOZPbP1lZU3FNYzveOfUW2afMD1Hj7o_fRdP3LU9gdtPaqb1Nk9jZRB_uru964tQhQ5P75J62YmCs0PeADET5kNw50XEaj8gPCULoghCqArYghB4IAUEIBoSgQAjrChCEYEAIBoSgQAjpd-iCEAwIoQPCIxiDhCBoCEIDwcfk0-tocvzW0n1ArIza3LN8ZFl2ylMWZDkyLsZ4UlDHzgub5oVIktBOvZDlPKRBloocjWS0SXiQOMJmhVMU7hOyV1aleEqA8VD4zPN8D5UQd3O01gMaZsKmacr9nB4QyzzkeKnKvcQmDvIiVkKJpVDkKArlgPhGErFJZcbNN0a43TCPXTdP1FqR1PHv4NSdqUmyIr83XvPZP1_zkNzd_kGfk7316lK8ILezzXpWr15qXP8C9_7kdg |
| linkProvider | Elsevier |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=P122+Contribution+of+integrated+somatosensory+and+auditory+inputs+to+the+cortical+response+evoked+by+transcranial+magnetic+stimulation%3A+A+sham+TMS-EEG+study&rft.jtitle=Clinical+neurophysiology&rft.au=Conde%2C+V&rft.au=Akopian%2C+I&rft.au=Tomasevic%2C+L&rft.au=Stanek%2C+K&rft.date=2017-03-01&rft.issn=1388-2457&rft.volume=128&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e75&rft.epage=e76&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.clinph.2016.10.244&rft.externalDBID=ECK1-s2.0-S1388245716308203&rft.externalDocID=1_s2_0_S1388245716308203 |
| thumbnail_m | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F13882457%2FS1388245717X00023%2Fcov150h.gif |