Back

Transcranial magnetic stimulation of primary motor cortex elicits a site-specific immediate transcranial evoked potential

Beck, M. M.; Christiansen, L.; Madsen, M. A. J.; Jadidi, A. F.; Vinding, M. C.; Thielscher, A.; Bergmann, T. O.; Siebner, H. R.; Tomasevic, L.

2023-09-05 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.09.05.556160 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundTranscranial evoked potentials (TEPs) measured via electroencephalography (EEG) are widely used to study the cortical responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Immediate transcranial evoked potentials (i-TEPs) have been obscured by pulse and muscular artifacts. Thus, the TEP peaks that are commonly reported have latencies that are too long to be caused by direct excitation of cortical neurons. MethodsIn 14 healthy individuals, we recorded i-TEPs evoked by a single biphasic TMS pulse targeting the primary motor hand area (M1HAND) or parietal or midline control sites. Sampling EEG at 50 kHz enabled us to reduce the duration of the TMS pulse artifact to a few milliseconds, while minor adjustments of the TMS coil tilt or position enabled us to avoid cranial muscular twitches during the experiment. ResultsWe observed an early positive EEG deflection starting after approx. 2 ms combined with a series of peaks with an inter-peak interval of [~]1.1-1.4 ms in electrodes overlying the stimulated sensorimotor region. This multi-peak i-TEP response was only evoked by TMS of the M1HAND region and was modified by changes in stimulation intensity and current direction. DiscussionSingle-pulse TMS of the M1HAND evokes an immediate local multi-peak response at the cortical site of stimulation. Our results suggest that the observed i-TEP patterns are genuine cortical responses evoked by TMS caused by synchronized excitation of pyramidal neurons in the targeted precentral cortex. This notion needs to be corroborated in future studies, including further investigations into the potential contribution of instrumental or physiological artifacts.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.