Cortico‐cortical and motor evoked potentials to single and paired‐pulse stimuli: An exploratory transcranial magnetic and intracranial electric brain stimulation study. Issue 11 (6th October 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Boulogne, Sébastien; Andre‐Obadia, Nathalie; Kimiskidis, Vasilios K; Ryvlin, Philippe; Rheims, Sylvain
• Is Part Of: Human brain mapping. Volume 37:Issue 11(2016:Nov.)
• Page Start: 3767
• Page End: 3778
• Publication Date: 2016-10-06
• Subjects: paired‐pulse -- epilepsy -- cortical excitability -- motor evoked potentials -- transcranial magnetic stimulation -- cortico‐cortical evoked potentials -- motor cortex; Brain mapping -- Periodicals; 611.81
• DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23274
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1065-9471

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Paired‐pulse (PP) paradigms are commonly employed to assess in vivo cortical excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to stimulate the primary motor cortex and modulate the induced motor evoked potential (MEP). Single‐pulse cortical direct electrical stimulation (DES) during intracerebral EEG monitoring allows the investigation of brain connectivity by eliciting cortico‐cortical evoked potentials (CCEPs). However, PP paradigm using intracerebral DES has rarely been reported and has never been previously compared with TMS. Objective: The work was intended (i) to verify that the well‐established modulations of MEPs following PP TMS remain similar using DES in the motor cortex, and (ii) to evaluate if a similar pattern could be observed in distant cortico‐cortical connections through modulations of CCEP. Methods: Three patients undergoing intracerebral EEG monitoring with electrodes implanted in the central region were studied. Single‐pulse DES (1–3 mA, 1 ms, 0.2 Hz) and PP DES using six interstimulus intervals (5, 15, 30, 50, 100, and 200 ms) in the motor cortex with concomitant recording of CCEPs and MEPs in contralateral muscles were performed. Finally, a navigated PP TMS session targeted the intracranial stimulation site to record TMS‐induced MEPs in two patients. Results: MEP modulations elicited by PP intracerebral DES proved similar among the three patients and to those obtained by PP TMS. CCEP modulations elicited by PP intracerebral DES usually showed a pattern comparable to that of MEP, although a different pattern could be observed occasionally. Conclusion: PP intracerebral DES seems to involve excitatory and inhibitory mechanisms similar to PP TMS and allows the recording of intracortical inhibition and facilitation modulation on cortico‐cortical connections. Hum Brain Mapp 37:3767–3778, 2016 . ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.