Frontoparietal TMS-EEG: Transcranially versus Peripherally Induced Brain Responses

H. Siebner, V. Conde, Axel Thielscher, T. Bergmann, G. Saturnino, L. Tomasevic

Research output: Contribution to journalConference abstract in journalResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can induce action potentials in frontal or parietal areas which may spread to connected cortical areas via fiber tracts. The local and distributed cortical response to TMS can be mapped with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also results in an effective acoustical and somatosensory stimulation. The co-stimulation of peripheral neural structures may contribute to the TMSevoked EEG potentials (TEPs). Methods: The aim of this study was to delineate the contribution of peripheral multi-sensory co-stimulation to the TEPs. In healthy young individuals, we recorded the TEPs evoked by real TMS over the left paramedian prefrontal or posterior parietal cortex using a figure-of-eight coil. State-of-the-art procedures were applied to attenuate somatosensory and auditory confounds during real TMS, including the placement of a foam layer underneath the coil and auditory noise masking. We also recorded the EEG responses evoked by realistic sham stimulation of the same areas. Realistic sham stimulation mimicked the auditory and somatosensory sensations evoked by real TMS. Data analyses tested for similarities between the EEG responses evoked by real and realistic sham stimulation. Results: The temporal and spatial patterns of the cortical potentials evoked by real TMS at the prefrontal and parietal site closely resembled the cortical potentials evoked by realistic sham TMS. This was the case for both, early and late TEP components. EEG responses were influenced by the intensity of the TMS pulse in the real and realistic sham condition.
Conclusion: Peripheral TMS-induced co-activation makes a substantial contribution to the TEPs. Future TMS-EEG studies should include a peripheral multisensory control stimulation in their study design. Otherwise, it is not possible to decide whether a finding is caused by the transcranial or the non-transcranial components of TEPs.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBrain Stimulation
Volume12
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)429
Number of pages1
ISSN1935-861X
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Cite this

Siebner, H. ; Conde, V. ; Thielscher, Axel ; Bergmann, T. ; Saturnino, G. ; Tomasevic, L. / Frontoparietal TMS-EEG: Transcranially versus Peripherally Induced Brain Responses. In: Brain Stimulation. 2019 ; Vol. 12, No. 2. pp. 429.
@article{187831b324934823bc037cbed2c455a4,
title = "Frontoparietal TMS-EEG: Transcranially versus Peripherally Induced Brain Responses",
abstract = "Background: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can induce action potentials in frontal or parietal areas which may spread to connected cortical areas via fiber tracts. The local and distributed cortical response to TMS can be mapped with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also results in an effective acoustical and somatosensory stimulation. The co-stimulation of peripheral neural structures may contribute to the TMSevoked EEG potentials (TEPs). Methods: The aim of this study was to delineate the contribution of peripheral multi-sensory co-stimulation to the TEPs. In healthy young individuals, we recorded the TEPs evoked by real TMS over the left paramedian prefrontal or posterior parietal cortex using a figure-of-eight coil. State-of-the-art procedures were applied to attenuate somatosensory and auditory confounds during real TMS, including the placement of a foam layer underneath the coil and auditory noise masking. We also recorded the EEG responses evoked by realistic sham stimulation of the same areas. Realistic sham stimulation mimicked the auditory and somatosensory sensations evoked by real TMS. Data analyses tested for similarities between the EEG responses evoked by real and realistic sham stimulation. Results: The temporal and spatial patterns of the cortical potentials evoked by real TMS at the prefrontal and parietal site closely resembled the cortical potentials evoked by realistic sham TMS. This was the case for both, early and late TEP components. EEG responses were influenced by the intensity of the TMS pulse in the real and realistic sham condition.Conclusion: Peripheral TMS-induced co-activation makes a substantial contribution to the TEPs. Future TMS-EEG studies should include a peripheral multisensory control stimulation in their study design. Otherwise, it is not possible to decide whether a finding is caused by the transcranial or the non-transcranial components of TEPs.",
author = "H. Siebner and V. Conde and Axel Thielscher and T. Bergmann and G. Saturnino and L. Tomasevic",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1016/j.brs.2018.12.388",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "429",
journal = "Brain Stimulation",
issn = "1935-861X",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

Frontoparietal TMS-EEG: Transcranially versus Peripherally Induced Brain Responses. / Siebner, H.; Conde, V.; Thielscher, Axel; Bergmann, T.; Saturnino, G.; Tomasevic, L.

In: Brain Stimulation, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2019, p. 429.

Research output: Contribution to journalConference abstract in journalResearchpeer-review

TY - ABST

T1 - Frontoparietal TMS-EEG: Transcranially versus Peripherally Induced Brain Responses

AU - Siebner, H.

AU - Conde, V.

AU - Thielscher, Axel

AU - Bergmann, T.

AU - Saturnino, G.

AU - Tomasevic, L.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Background: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can induce action potentials in frontal or parietal areas which may spread to connected cortical areas via fiber tracts. The local and distributed cortical response to TMS can be mapped with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also results in an effective acoustical and somatosensory stimulation. The co-stimulation of peripheral neural structures may contribute to the TMSevoked EEG potentials (TEPs). Methods: The aim of this study was to delineate the contribution of peripheral multi-sensory co-stimulation to the TEPs. In healthy young individuals, we recorded the TEPs evoked by real TMS over the left paramedian prefrontal or posterior parietal cortex using a figure-of-eight coil. State-of-the-art procedures were applied to attenuate somatosensory and auditory confounds during real TMS, including the placement of a foam layer underneath the coil and auditory noise masking. We also recorded the EEG responses evoked by realistic sham stimulation of the same areas. Realistic sham stimulation mimicked the auditory and somatosensory sensations evoked by real TMS. Data analyses tested for similarities between the EEG responses evoked by real and realistic sham stimulation. Results: The temporal and spatial patterns of the cortical potentials evoked by real TMS at the prefrontal and parietal site closely resembled the cortical potentials evoked by realistic sham TMS. This was the case for both, early and late TEP components. EEG responses were influenced by the intensity of the TMS pulse in the real and realistic sham condition.Conclusion: Peripheral TMS-induced co-activation makes a substantial contribution to the TEPs. Future TMS-EEG studies should include a peripheral multisensory control stimulation in their study design. Otherwise, it is not possible to decide whether a finding is caused by the transcranial or the non-transcranial components of TEPs.

AB - Background: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) can induce action potentials in frontal or parietal areas which may spread to connected cortical areas via fiber tracts. The local and distributed cortical response to TMS can be mapped with electroencephalography (EEG). However, TMS also results in an effective acoustical and somatosensory stimulation. The co-stimulation of peripheral neural structures may contribute to the TMSevoked EEG potentials (TEPs). Methods: The aim of this study was to delineate the contribution of peripheral multi-sensory co-stimulation to the TEPs. In healthy young individuals, we recorded the TEPs evoked by real TMS over the left paramedian prefrontal or posterior parietal cortex using a figure-of-eight coil. State-of-the-art procedures were applied to attenuate somatosensory and auditory confounds during real TMS, including the placement of a foam layer underneath the coil and auditory noise masking. We also recorded the EEG responses evoked by realistic sham stimulation of the same areas. Realistic sham stimulation mimicked the auditory and somatosensory sensations evoked by real TMS. Data analyses tested for similarities between the EEG responses evoked by real and realistic sham stimulation. Results: The temporal and spatial patterns of the cortical potentials evoked by real TMS at the prefrontal and parietal site closely resembled the cortical potentials evoked by realistic sham TMS. This was the case for both, early and late TEP components. EEG responses were influenced by the intensity of the TMS pulse in the real and realistic sham condition.Conclusion: Peripheral TMS-induced co-activation makes a substantial contribution to the TEPs. Future TMS-EEG studies should include a peripheral multisensory control stimulation in their study design. Otherwise, it is not possible to decide whether a finding is caused by the transcranial or the non-transcranial components of TEPs.

U2 - 10.1016/j.brs.2018.12.388

DO - 10.1016/j.brs.2018.12.388

M3 - Conference abstract in journal

VL - 12

SP - 429

JO - Brain Stimulation

JF - Brain Stimulation

SN - 1935-861X

IS - 2

ER -