Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Reliability of targeting methods in TMS for depression: Beam F3 vs. 5.5 cm.
Trapp, Nicholas T; Bruss, Joel; King Johnson, Marcie; Uitermarkt, Brandt D; Garrett, Laren; Heinzerling, Amanda; Wu, Chaorong; Koscik, Timothy R; Ten Eyck, Patrick; Boes, Aaron D.
Afiliação
  • Trapp NT; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States. Electronic address: nicholas-trapp@uiowa.edu.
  • Bruss J; Department of Neurology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • King Johnson M; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Uitermarkt BD; Department of Pediatrics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Garrett L; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Heinzerling A; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Wu C; Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Koscik TR; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Ten Eyck P; Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Boes AD; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States; Department of Neurology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States; Department of Pediatrics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Brain Stimul ; 13(3): 578-581, 2020.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32289680
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

No consensus exists in the clinical transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) field as to the best method for targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for depression treatment. Two common targeting methods are the Beam F3 method and the 5.5 cm rule.

OBJECTIVE:

Evaluate the anatomical reliability of technician-identified DLPFC targets and obtain consensus average brain and scalp MNI152 coordinates.

METHODS:

Three trained TMS technicians performed repeated targeting using both the Beam F3 method and 5.5 cm rule in ten healthy subjects (n = 162). Average target locations were plotted on 7T structural MRIs to compare inter- and intra-rater reliability, respectively.

RESULTS:

(1) Beam F3 inter- and intra-rater reliability was superior to 5.5 cm targeting (p = 0.0005 and 0.0035). (2) The average Beam F3 location was 2.6±1.0 cm anterolateral to the 5.5 cm method.

CONCLUSIONS:

Beam F3 targeting demonstrates greater precision and reliability than the 5.5 cm method and identifies a different anatomical target.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética / Depressão / Estimulação Magnética Transcraniana Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética / Depressão / Estimulação Magnética Transcraniana Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article