ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2015
The impact of repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation coil positioning and stimulation parameters on human language function.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuromodulatory effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on language performance in healthy participants: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Improving the efficacy and reliability of rTMS language mapping by increasing the stimulation frequency.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Dosimetry Analysis in Non-brain Tissues During TMS Exposure of Broca's and M1 Areas.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Clinical Utility of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) in the Presurgical Evaluation of Motor, Speech, and Language Functions in Young Children With Refractory Epilepsy or Brain Tumor: Preliminary Evidence.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Focality of the Induced E-Field Is a Contributing Factor in the Choice of TMS Parameters: Evidence from a 3D Computational Model of the Human Brain.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Mapping visuospatial attention: the greyscales task in combination with repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation.BMC neuroscience · 2018Article
- Investigating Stimulation Protocols for Language Mapping by Repetitive Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2018Article
- Erratum to: The impact of repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation coil positioning and stimulation parameters on human language function.European journal of medical research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRepetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in combination with object naming is able to elicit naming errors by stimulating language-related brain regions. However, stimulation results mainly depend on coil positioning and stimulation parameters, which have not been investigated since the implementation of neuronavigation to transcranial magnetic stimulation. Therefore, the following three parameters were systematically examined in the present study: coil angulation, stimulation frequency, and stimulation intensity.
methodsFive healthy, right-handed subjects underwent rTMS language mapping of Broca's as well as Wernicke's areas of the left hemisphere. During mapping sessions, coil angulation was changed clockwise in 45° steps, and the stimulation frequency and intensity were varied within a considerably wide range. For angulation, the anterior-posterior (ap) coil orientation was used as reference position.
resultsAn angulation of 90° to ap coil orientation led to the highest rate of naming errors within Broca's area, whereas an inhomogeneous distribution of angulations was observed during stimulation of Wernicke's area. Therefore, ap coil orientation, which is regarded as standard in rTMS language mapping, could not be approved as the optimal position. With regard to stimulation parameters, 20 Hz and 120% of the resting motor threshold (RMT) were defined as optimal.
conclusionsCoil angulation, stimulation frequency, and stimulation intensity have significant impacts on language impairment during rTMS mapping. The variation of only one of these parameters already leads to a clearer disruption of language performance. Therefore, individually adapted stimulation protocols have to be determined prior to language mapping in order to improve mapping results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.