Kallioniemi Elisa, Pitkänen Minna, Könönen Mervi, Vanninen Ritva, Julkunen Petro
Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland; Department of Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland; Department of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland.
J Neurosci Methods. 2016 Nov 1;273:138-148. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.09.002. Epub 2016 Sep 9.
Although the relationship between neuronavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been widely studied in motor mapping, it is unknown how the motor response type or the choice of motor task affect this relationship.
Centers of gravity (CoGs) and response maxima were measured with blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) and arterial spin labeling (ASL) fMRI during motor tasks against nTMS CoGs and response maxima, which were mapped with motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and silent periods (SPs).
No differences in motor representations (CoGs and response maxima) were observed in lateral-medial direction (p=0.265). fMRI methods localized the motor representation more posterior than nTMS (p<0.001). This was not affected by the BOLD fMRI motor task (p>0.999) nor nTMS response type (p>0.999). ASL fMRI maxima did not differ from the nTMS nor BOLD fMRI CoGs (p≥0.070), but the ASL CoG was deeper in comparison to other methods (p≤0.042). The BOLD fMRI motor task did not influence the depth of the motor representation (p≥0.745). The median Euclidean distances between the nTMS and fMRI motor representations varied between 7.7mm and 14.5mm and did not differ between the methods (F≤1.23, p≥0.318).
The relationship between fMRI and nTMS mapped excitatory (MEP) and inhibitory (SP) responses, and whether the choice of motor task affects this relationship, have not been studied before.
The congruence between fMRI and nTMS is good. The choice of nTMS motor response type nor BOLD fMRI motor task had no effect on this relationship.
尽管在运动映射中，神经导航经颅磁刺激（nTMS）与功能磁共振成像（fMRI）之间的关系已得到广泛研究，但运动反应类型或运动任务的选择如何影响这种关系尚不清楚。
在针对nTMS重心和反应最大值的运动任务期间，使用血氧水平依赖（BOLD）和动脉自旋标记（ASL）功能磁共振成像测量重心（CoGs）和反应最大值，这些通过运动诱发电位（MEPs）和静息期（SPs）进行映射。
在内外侧方向上未观察到运动表征（重心和反应最大值）的差异（p = 0.265）。功能磁共振成像方法将运动表征定位得比nTMS更靠后（p < 0.001）。这不受BOLD功能磁共振成像运动任务（p > 0.999）和nTMS反应类型（p > 0.999）的影响。ASL功能磁共振成像的最大值与nTMS和BOLD功能磁共振成像的重心没有差异（p≥0.070），但与其他方法相比，ASL重心更深（p≤0.042）。BOLD功能磁共振成像运动任务不影响运动表征的深度（p≥0.745）。nTMS与功能磁共振成像运动表征之间的欧几里得距离中位数在7.7毫米至14.5毫米之间，各方法之间没有差异（F≤1.23，p≥0.318）。
功能磁共振成像与nTMS映射的兴奋性（MEP）和抑制性（SP）反应之间的关系，以及运动任务的选择是否影响这种关系，此前尚未研究。
功能磁共振成像与nTMS之间的一致性良好。nTMS运动反应类型或BOLD功能磁共振成像运动任务的选择对这种关系没有影响。
