Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundTranscranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is increasingly used as a promising non-pharmacological treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD). Scalp-to-cortex distance (SCD), as a key technical parameter of TMS, plays a critical role in determining the locations of treatment targets and corresponding dosage. Due to the discrepancies in TMS protocols, the optimal targets and head models have yet to be established in PD patients.ObjectiveTo investigate the SCDs of the most popular used targets in left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and quantify its impact on the TMS-induced electric fields (E-fields) in early-stage PD patients.MethodsStructural magnetic resonance imaging scans from PD patients (n = 47) and normal controls (n = 36) were drawn from the NEUROCON and Tao Wu datasets. SCD of left DLPFC was measured by Euclidean Distance in TMS Navigation system. The intensity and focality of SCD-dependent E-fields were examined and quantified using Finite Element Method.ResultsEarly-stage PD patients showed an increased SCDs, higher variances in the SCDs and SCD-dependent E-fields across the seven targets of left DLPFC than normal controls. The stimulation targets located on gyral crown had more focal and homogeneous E-fields. The SCD of left DLPFC had a better performance in differentiating early-stage PD patients than global cognition and other brain measures.ConclusionSCD and SCD-dependent E-fields could determine the optimal TMS treatment targets and may also be used as a novel marker to differentiate early-stage PD patients. Our findings have important implications for developing optimal TMS protocols and personalized dosimetry in real-world clinical practice.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.