No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Die transkranielle Magnetstimulation (TMS) ist ein nichtinvasives Hirnstimulationsverfahren, mit welchem sowohl die funktionelle Untersuchung umschriebener kortikaler Regionen als auch die Modulation der Erregbarkeit ebendieser sowie die Induktion neuroplastischer Phänomene möglich ist. Sie wurde in der Vergangenheit insbesondere bei der Erforschung des humanen zentralmotorischen Systems angewandt. Dabei zeigte sich, dass ein einzelner über dem primärmotorischen Areal (M1) applizierter TMS-Puls multiple deszendierende Erregungswellen im Kortikospinaltrakt induzieren kann. Von diesen Undulationen besitzt die D-Welle (direkte Welle) die kürzeste Latenz und sie rekurriert auf eine direkte Aktivierung kortikospinaler Neurone, wohingegen I-Wellen (indirekte Wellen) längere Latenzen besitzen und durch transsynaptische Aktivierung dieser Zellen entstehen. Bemerkenswert ist das periodische Auftreten der letztgenannten Erregungswellen mit einer Periodendauer von etwa 1,5 ms. Zwar sind die genauen Mechanismen noch unbekannt, welche der Entstehung dieser I-Wellen sowie dem Phänomen der I-Wellen-Fazilitierung, das sich in geeigneten TMS-Doppelpulsprotokollen offenbart, zugrunde liegen, jedoch existieren hierzu verschiedene Erklärungsmodelle. Im Mittelpunkt der vorliegenden Arbeit steht die repetitive Anwendung eines TMS-Doppelpulsprotokolls, bei dem das Interpulsintervall (IPI) im Bereich der I-Wellen-Periodizität liegt (iTMS) und das gleichsam durch eine Implementierung der I-Wellen-Fazilitierung in der repetitiven TMS charakterisiert ist. Da gezeigt werden konnte, dass iTMS mit einem IPI von 1,5 ms (iTMS_1,5ms) die kortikospinale Erregbarkeit signifikant intra- und postinterventionell zu steigern vermag, und die I-Wellen-Periodizität interindividuellen Schwankungen unterliegt, wurde in der hier vorgestellten Studie an Normalprobanden der Einfluss einer individuellen Anpassung des IPIs (resultierend in der iTMS_adj) auf die intrainterventionelle kortikospinale Erregbarkeit untersucht. In der Tat stellte sich heraus, dass die iTMS_adj der iTMS_1,5ms diesbezüglich überlegen ist. Dieses Ergebnis unterstreicht das Potential einer Individualisierung der interventionellen TMS für erregbarkeitsmodulierende Effekte und macht dasjenige der ohnehin auf physiologische Prozesse abgestimmten iTMS explizit, was insbesondere für klinische Anwendungen relevant sein mag.

Background: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging approach for improving capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) and upper limb function after stroke. However, it remains unclear what type of tDCS stimulation is most effective. Our aim was to give an overview of the evidence network regarding the efficacy and safety of tDCS and to estimate the effectiveness of the different stimulation types. Methods: We performed a systematic review of randomised trials using network meta-analysis (NMA), searching the following databases until 5 July 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science, and four other databases. We included studies with adult people with stroke. We compared any kind of active tDCS (anodal, cathodal, or dual, that is applying anodal and cathodal tDCS concurrently) regarding improvement of our primary outcome of ADL capacity, versus control, after stroke. PROSPERO ID: CRD42016042055. Results: We included 26 studies with 754 participants. Our NMA showed evidence of an effect of cathodal tDCS in improving our primary outcome, that of ADL capacity (standardized mean difference, SMD = 0.42; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.70). tDCS did not improve our secondary outcome, that of arm function, measured by the Fugl-Meyer upperextremity assessment (FM-UE). There was no difference in safety between tDCS and its control interventions, measured by the number of dropouts and adverse events. Conclusion: Comparing different forms of tDCS shows that cathodal tDCS is the most promising treatment option to improve ADL capacity in people with stroke.

Background: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging approach for improving capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) and upper limb function after stroke. However, it remains unclear what type of tDCS stimulation is most effective. Our aim was to give an overview of the evidence network regarding the efficacy and safety of tDCS and to estimate the effectiveness of the different stimulation types. Methods: We performed a systematic review of randomised trials using network meta-analysis (NMA), searching the following databases until 5 July 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science, and four other databases. We included studies with adult people with stroke. We compared any kind of active tDCS (anodal, cathodal, or dual, that is applying anodal and cathodal tDCS concurrently) regarding improvement of our primary outcome of ADL capacity, versus control, after stroke. PROSPERO ID: CRD42016042055. Results: We included 26 studies with 754 participants. Our NMA showed evidence of an effect of cathodal tDCS in improving our primary outcome, that of ADL capacity (standardized mean difference, SMD = 0.42; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.70). tDCS did not improve our secondary outcome, that of arm function, measured by the Fugl-Meyer upperextremity assessment (FM-UE). There was no difference in safety between tDCS and its control interventions, measured by the number of dropouts and adverse events. Conclusion: Comparing different forms of tDCS shows that cathodal tDCS is the most promising treatment option to improve ADL capacity in people with stroke.

A full-sine (biphasic) pulse waveform is most commonly used for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), but little is known about how variations in duration or amplitude of distinct pulse segments influence the effectiveness of a single TMS pulse to elicit a corticomotor response. Using a novel TMS device, we systematically varied the configuration of full-sine pulses to assess the impact of configuration changes on resting motor threshold (RMT) as measure of stimulation effectiveness with single-pulse TMS of the non-dominant motor hand area (M1). In young healthy volunteers, we (i) compared monophasic, half-sine, and full-sine pulses, (ii) applied two-segment pulses consisting of two identical half-sines, and (iii) manipulated amplitude, duration, and current direction of the first or second full-sine pulse half-segments. RMT was significantly higher using half-sine or monophasic pulses compared with full-sine. Pulses combining two half-sines of identical polarity and duration were also characterized by higher RMT than fullsine stimuli resulting. For full-sine stimuli, decreasing the amplitude of the halfsegment inducing posterior-anterior oriented current in M1 resulted in considerably higher RMT, whereas varying the amplitude of the half-segment inducing anterior-posterior current had a smaller effect. These findings provide direct experimental evidence that the pulse segment inducing a posterior anterior directed current in M1 contributes most to corticospinal pathway excitation. Preferential excitation of neuronal target cells in the posterior-anterior segment or targeting of different neuronal structures by the two half-segments can explain this result. Thus, our findings help understanding the mechanisms of neural stimulation by full-sine TMS.

We prospectively evaluated 30 consecutive patients with echo-enhanced transcranial color-coded duplexsonography (TCCD) and correlative transfemoral digital subtraction angiography to assess the diagnostic efficacy of echo-enhanced TCCD for evaluation of collateral pathways through the circle of Willis in patients with limited acoustic bone windows and critical symptomatic carotid disease. Echo-enhanced TCCD detected collateral blood flow through the anterior communicating artery in 16 of 18 patients (sensitivity 89%, 95% CI 65–99%) and was false positive in one out of 12 patients without collateral flow (specificity 92%, 95% CI 59–100%). For the posterior communicating artery, sensitivity was 11/14 (79%, 95% CI 49–95%) and specificity was 15/16 (94%, 95% CI 70–100%). Echo-enhanced TCCD enables to study collateral blood flow through the communicating arteries of the circle of Willis with high sensitivity and specificity in patients with obstructions of the internal carotid artery and limited acoustic bone windows. / Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG-geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich.