Short Interval Intracortical Inhibition Responses ... - BV FAPESP
Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Short Interval Intracortical Inhibition Responses to Low-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Under Multiple Interstimulus Intervals and Conditioning Intensities

Full text
Author(s):
Chen, Mo [1, 2] ; Lixandrao, Maira C. [1, 3] ; Prudente, Cecilia N. [1] ; Summers, Rebekah L. S. [1] ; Kimberley, Teresa J. [1, 4]
Total Authors: 5
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Minnesota, Sch Med, Dept Rehabil Med, Div Phys Therapy, 426 Church St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 - USA
[2] Univ Minnesota, Dept Psychiat, Minneapolis, MN 55455 - USA
[3] Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Phys Therapy Dept, Sao Paulo, SP - Brazil
[4] MGH Inst Hlth Profess Charlestown Navy Yard, Dept Phys Therapy, Boston, MA - USA
Total Affiliations: 4
Document type: Journal article
Source: NEUROMODULATION; v. 21, n. 4, p. 368-375, JUN 2018.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

BackgroundThe extent to which short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) responds to low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) remains inconclusive with reports of increased, decreased and unchanged response following modulation. The aim of this study was to systematically investigate if the variability of SICI following rTMS is explained by the interstimulus interval (ISI) and/or the conditioning stimulus intensity (CSI). MethodsTwo experiments with pretesting/posttesting and an rTMS session (1 Hz, 90% RMT, 900 pulses) were done. Experiment I (N=15): SICI with multiple ISIs (1.0-4.0 msec, 0.2 msec increment). Experiment II (N=15): SICI with CSIs (50-95% of RMT, 5% increment). In both experiments, the cortical silent period (cSP) was also collected. ResultsAfter low-frequency rTMS, no significant change (p>0.10) in SICI at any specific ISI or CSI was observed, nor did the optimal ISI or CSI change. However, a significant decrease was observed in SICI responses when assessed under the range of ISIs (p=0.0001), but not CSIs. cSP inhibition increased significantly (p<0.0015) for both experiments. ConclusionsThe optimal ISI or CSI did not shift or reveal SICI changes after inhibitory rTMS. However, when the whole curve of SICI responses were evaluated from a wide range of ISIs, a decrease in inhibition was found. The contrast between the results of individual ISI tests and the wide range of ISI assessment may be due to higher intersubject variability of SICI and/or sample size, rendering traditional SICI testing methods ineffective for measuring changes in inhibition. Further, it is possible that rTMS modulates GABA(A) and GABA(B) mediated inhibitory processes differently, which would explain the conflicting results for SICI and cSP. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 15/16744-4 - Comparing the efficacy of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation at two locations: EEG and TMS-derived hotspot
Grantee:Maíra Carolina Lixandrão
Support Opportunities: Scholarships abroad - Research Internship - Doctorate (Direct)