A comparison of two methods for estimating 50% of the maximal motor evoked potential

  • Julia B. Pitcher
  • , Sebastian H. Doeltgen
  • , Mitchell R. Goldsworthy
  • , Luke A. Schneider
  • , Ann Maree Vallence
  • , Ashleigh E. Smith
  • , John G. Semmler
  • , Michelle N. McDonnell
  • , Michael C. Ridding

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: Two commonly-used methods for setting stimulus intensities in transcranial magnetic brain stimulation studies were compared to determine which best approximated a motor evoked potential (MEP) of 50% of the maximal MEP amplitude (SI50); a suprathreshold intensity relative to resting motor threshold (rMT) or adjusting the intensity to evoke an MEP amplitude of 1mV. Methods: Corticomotor stimulus-response curves and rMT for the right first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of 176 subjects (aged 10-74. years) were retrospectively analysed. Results: Regardless of subject age or sex, SI50 occurred at 127.5±11.3% rMT. Except in young children, MEPs of 1mV were significantly smaller than those evoked at SI50. Conclusions: In the inactive FDI muscle, a stimulus intensity of 127-128% rMT consistently gives the best approximation of SI50 in most subjects, except perhaps young children. Significance: Setting TMS stimulus intensities relative to rMT provides a less variable inter-subject comparator, with respect to individual differences in corticomotor input-output characteristics, than adjusting the stimulator output to give an absolute MEP magnitude.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2337-2341
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Neurophysiology
Volume126
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished or Issued - Dec 2015
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Ageing
  • Children
  • Corticomotor stimulus-response curves
  • First dorsal interosseous
  • Motor evoked potential
  • Resting motor threshold

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sensory Systems
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this