Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparing cortico-motor hotspot identification methods in the lower extremities post-stroke: MEP amplitude vs. latency.
Kindred, J H; Cash, J J; Ergle, J B; Charalambous, C C; Wonsetler, E C; Bowden, M G.
Afiliação
  • Kindred JH; Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC, United States; Division of Physical Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.
  • Cash JJ; Department of Health Sciences and Research, College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.
  • Ergle JB; Department of Health Sciences and Research, College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.
  • Charalambous CC; Department of Basic and Clinical Sciences, Medical School, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus; Center for Neuroscience and Integrative Brain Research (CENIBRE), Medical School, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus.
  • Wonsetler EC; Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, School of Medicine, Tufts University, Boston, MA, United States.
  • Bowden MG; Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC, United States; Division of Physical Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States; Department of Health Sciences and Research, College of Health Pr
Neurosci Lett ; 754: 135884, 2021 05 29.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33862144
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a technique used to probe and measure cortico-motor responses of the nervous system. However, lower extremity (LE) specific methodology has been slow to develop. In this retrospective analysis, we investigated what motor evoked potential metric, amplitude (MEPamp) or latency (MEPlat), best distinguished the motor-cortical target, i.e. hotspot, of the tibialis anterior and soleus post-stroke. Twenty-three participants with stroke were included in this investigation. Neuronavigation was used to map hotspots, derived via MEPamp and MEPlat, over a 3cm × 5cm grid. Distances between points with the greatest response within a session and between days were compared. Both criterion, amplitude and latency, provided poor identification of locations between trials within a session, and between multiple visits. Identified hotspots were similar only 15 % and 8% of the time between two assessments within the same session, for amplitude and latency respectively. However, MEPamp was more consistent in identifying hotspots, evidenced by locations being less spatially distant from each other (Amplitude: 1.4 cm (SD 0.10) Latency: 1.7 (SD 1.04), P = 0.008) within a session and between days (Amplitude: 1.3 cm (SD 0.95), Latency 1.9 cm (SD 1.14), P = 0.004). While more work is needed to develop LE specific methodology for TMS, especially as it applies to investigating gait impairments, MEPamp appears to be a more consistent criterion for hotspot identification when compared to MEPlat. It is recommended that future works continue to use MEPamp when identifying tibialis anterior and soleus hotspots using neuronavigation.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Mapeamento Encefálico / Músculo Esquelético / Acidente Vascular Cerebral / Extremidade Inferior / Córtex Motor Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Mapeamento Encefálico / Músculo Esquelético / Acidente Vascular Cerebral / Extremidade Inferior / Córtex Motor Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article