首页> 外文期刊>Neuroreport >Motor cortex-induced plasticity by noninvasive brain stimulation: A comparison between transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation
【24h】

Motor cortex-induced plasticity by noninvasive brain stimulation: A comparison between transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation

机译:非侵入性脑刺激对运动皮层诱导的可塑性:经颅直流电刺激与经颅磁刺激的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of this study was to test and compare the effects of a within-subject design of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) [coupled with sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)] and tDCS (coupled with sham rTMS) on the motor cortex excitability and also compare the results against sham tDCS/sham rTMS. We conducted a double-blinded, randomized, sham-controlled, cross-over trial. Eleven right-handed, healthy individuals (five women, mean age: 39.8 years, SD 13.4) received the three interventions (cross-over design) in a randomized order: (a) high-frequency (HF) rTMS (+sham tDCS), (b) anodal tDCS (+sham rTMS), and (c) sham stimulation (sham rTMS+sham tDCS). Cortical excitability measurements [motor threshold, motor evoked potential (MEP), intracortical facilitation and inhibition, and transcallosal inhibition] and motor behavioral assessments were used as outcome measures. Between-group analysis of variance showed that MEP amplitude after HF rTMS was significantly higher than MEP amplitude after anodal tDCS (P=0.001). Post-hoc analysis showed a significant increase in MEP amplitude after HF rTMS (25.3%, P=0.036) and a significant decrease in MEP amplitude after anodal tDCS (-32.7%, P=0.001). There was a similar increase in motor function as indexed by Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test in the two active groups compared with sham stimulation. In conclusion, here, we showed that although both techniques induced similar motor gains, they induce opposing results in cortical excitability. HF rTMS is associated with an increase in corticospinal excitability, whereas 20 min of tDCS induces the opposite effect. We discuss potential implications of these results to future clinical experiments using rTMS or tDCS for motor function enhancement.
机译:这项研究的目的是测试和比较重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)[与假经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)结合]和tDCS(与假rTMS结合)的受试者设计对运动皮层的影响兴奋性,并将结果与​​假tDCS /假rTMS进行比较。我们进行了一项双盲,随机,假对照的交叉试验。十一位右撇子健康个体(五名女性,平均年龄:39.8岁,SD 13.4)以随机顺序接受了三种干预(交叉设计):(a)高频(HF)rTMS(+ sham tDCS) ,(b)阳极tDCS(+ sham rTMS)和(c)假刺激(sham rTMS + sham tDCS)。皮层兴奋性测量[运动阈值,运动诱发电位(MEP),皮层内促进和抑制以及经call的抑制]和运动行为评估被用作结果指标。组间方差分析表明,HF rTMS后的MEP幅度显着高于阳极tDCS后的MEP幅度(P = 0.001)。事后分析显示,HF rTMS后MEP振幅显着增加(25.3%,P = 0.036),阳极tDCS后MEP振幅显着下降(-32.7%,P = 0.001)。与假刺激相比,在两个活跃组中,运动功能的增加与Jebsen-Taylor手功能测试所确定的相似。总而言之,在这里,我们表明,尽管两种技术均能产生相似的运动增益,但它们在皮层兴奋性方面却产生相反的结果。 HF rTMS与皮质脊髓兴奋性的增加有关,而20分钟的tDCS诱导相反的作用。我们讨论这些结果对未来使用rTMS或tDCS增强运动功能的临床实验的潜在影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号