ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2024
Comparing the efficacy of awake and sedated MEG to TMS in mapping hand sensorimotor cortex in a clinical cohort.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dose-dependent power and connectivity modulation of low frequency oscillations through transcranial magnetic stimulation in non-human primates.Journal of neural engineering · 2026Article
- Dose-dependent power and connectivity modulation of low frequency oscillations through transcranial magnetic stimulation in non-human primates.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-invasive methods such as Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) aid in the pre-surgical evaluation of patients with epilepsy or brain tumor to identify sensorimotor cortices. MEG requires sedation in children or patients with developmental delay. However, TMS can be applied to awake patients of all ages with any cognitive abilities. In this study, we compared the efficacy of TMS with MEG (in awake and sedated states) in identifying the hand sensorimotor areas in patients with epilepsy or brain tumors. We identified 153 patients who underwent awake- (n = 98) or sedated-MEG (n = 55), along with awake TMS for hand sensorimotor mapping as part of their pre-surgical evaluation. TMS involved stimulating the precentral gyrus and recording electromyography responses, while MEG identified the somatosensory cortex during median nerve stimulation. Awake-MEG had a success rate of 92.35 % and TMS had 99.49 % (p-value = 0.5517). However, in the sedated-MEG cohort, TMS success rate of 95.61 % was significantly higher compared to MEG's 58.77 % (p-value = 0.0001). Factors affecting mapping success were analyzed. Logistic regression across the entire cohort identified patient sedation as the lone significant predictor, contrary to age, lesion, metal, and number of antiseizure medications (ASMs). A subsequent analysis replaced sedation with anesthetic drug dosage, revealing no significant predictors impacting somatosensory mapping success under sedation. This study yields insights into the utility of TMS and MEG in mapping hand sensorimotor cortices and underscores the importance of considering factors that influence eloquent cortex mapping limitations during sedation.
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.