Key result
Voluntary facilitation (20, 40, and 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure) decreased motor threshold and latency and increased MEP amplitude in the diaphragm compared to relaxation.
Why the study?
Does voluntary facilitation alter the diaphragmatic motor-evoked potential response to transcranial magnetic stimulation in healthy subjects?
Does voluntary facilitation alter the diaphragmatic motor-evoked potential response to transcranial magnetic stimulation in healthy subjects?
Voluntary facilitation consistently alters the diaphragmatic motor-evoked potential response to transcranial magnetic stimulation, establishing it as a robust tool for investigating supraspinal pathways.
Voluntary facilitation may refine diaphragmatic TMS protocols in research; leaves open validation in clinical respiratory populations.
We assessed recruitment curves of the surface diaphragm motor-evoked potential (MEP) after transcranial magnetic stimulation during relaxation and at three different levels of facilitation (20, 40, and 60% of maximal inspiratory esophageal pressure) in 10 healthy subjects (six young and four elderly). MEP amplitude recruitment curves varied between individuals during relaxation and at each level of facilitation. Amplitude recruitment curves during relaxation were reproducible in individual subjects. Inspiratory maneuvers caused a decrease in motor threshold and latency and an increase in MEP amplitude, positively correlated to the intensity of facilitation. These changes were similar in young and elderly subjects. The best fit for MEP amplitude recruitment curves for each condition was obtained with a Boltzmann model. The performance of repeated submaximal inspiratory maneuvers did not affect the amplitude recruitment curves of the relaxed diaphragm. We conclude that the recruitment curve of the diaphragm with transcranial magnetic stimulation is repeatable and changes consistently with facilitation and will, therefore, be a robust experimental tool for the investigation of supraspinal pathways to the diaphragm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharshar et al. (2003) studied Healthy (n=10). Voluntary facilitation during transcranial magnetic stimulation vs. Relaxation was evaluated on Recruitment curves of the surface diaphragm motor-evoked potential (MEP). Voluntary facilitation (20, 40, and 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure) decreased motor threshold and latency and increased MEP amplitude in the diaphragm compared to relaxation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: