回复：“反映小脑经颅磁刺激引发脑电图反应变异性的原因”
Reply to: "Reflecting the causes of variability of EEG responses elicited by cerebellar TMS".
作者信息
Fong Po-Yu, Spampinato Danny, Michell Kevin, Mancuso Marco, Brown Katlyn, Ibáñez Jaime, Di Santo Alessandro, Latorre Anna, Bhatia Kailash, Rothwell John C, Rocchi Lorenzo
机构信息
Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK; Division of Movement Disorders, Department of Neurology and Neuroscience Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan; Medical School, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK; Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Unit, IRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Via Ardeatina 306/354, Rome 00142, Italy.
出版信息
Neuroimage. 2023 Nov 1;281:120392. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120392. Epub 2023 Sep 26.
In their commentary on our recently published paper about electroencephalographic responses induced by cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation (Fong et al., 2023), Gassmann and colleagues (Gassmann et al., 2023b) try to explain the differences between our results and their own previous work on the same topic. We agree with them that many of the differences arise from our use of a different magnetic stimulation coil. However, two unresolved questions remain. (1) Which method is most likely to achieve optimal activation of cerebellar output? (2) To what extent are the evoked cerebellar responses contaminated by concomitant sensory input? We highlight the role of careful experimental design and of combining electrophysiological and behavioural data to obtain reliable TMS-EEG data.
在对我们最近发表的关于小脑经颅磁刺激诱发的脑电图反应的论文（方等人，2023年）的评论中，加斯曼及其同事（加斯曼等人，2023b）试图解释我们的结果与他们自己先前在同一主题上的研究之间的差异。我们同意他们的观点，即许多差异源于我们使用了不同的磁刺激线圈。然而，仍有两个未解决的问题。（1）哪种方法最有可能实现小脑输出的最佳激活？（2）诱发的小脑反应在多大程度上受到伴随感觉输入的污染？我们强调了精心设计实验以及结合电生理和行为数据以获得可靠的经颅磁刺激-脑电图数据的作用。
Zotero 插件