2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0006-3223(01)01153-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in therapy studies: examination of the reliability of “standard” coil positioning by neuronavigation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

12
174
4
7

Year Published

2003
2003
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 345 publications
(197 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
12
174
4
7
Order By: Relevance
“…With one exception, the observed deviations were below 5 mm. The maximally observed deviation was 6.0 mm, which still compares favorably to, e.g., coil placement according to the EEG 10-20 system (12) or relative to the motor representation of finger muscles (13). However, it will depend upon the experimental question if this amount of accuracy is sufficient or not.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…With one exception, the observed deviations were below 5 mm. The maximally observed deviation was 6.0 mm, which still compares favorably to, e.g., coil placement according to the EEG 10-20 system (12) or relative to the motor representation of finger muscles (13). However, it will depend upon the experimental question if this amount of accuracy is sufficient or not.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…However, the original study of the localization produced with standard 5 cm method conducted by Herwig et al (2001a) provides an estimation. The mean coordinates in that report on the y-and z-axis were 17 and 47 (SD ¼ 5,6) compared with the 45 and 35 we used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This involves the localization of the motor cortical site for optimal stimulation of a hand muscle, usually the abductor pollicis brevis, and then measurement 5 cm anteriorly along the scalp surface ('5 cm method'). However, when the fidelity of this method was evaluated, it localized stimulation to DLPFC (defined as cortical landmarks corresponding to Brodmann area, BA, 9) in only 7 of 22 subjects (Herwig et al, 2001a). An even lower success rate would have been likely if a more modern definition of DLPFC was used based on multiple brains such as that published by Rajkowska et al (Rajkowska and GoldmanRakic, 1995).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although in most cases not anatomically precise (Herwig et al, 2001), rTMS effects in clinical studies most probably relate to frontal forebrain stimulation (review: eg Padberg and Möller, 2003;Schlaepfer et al, 2003). Consequently, to reliably investigate the underlying neurobiological effects in animal models, the adoption of equivalent stimulation conditions is indispensable.…”
Section: Rtms In Rat Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%