Tolerability of transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in children
- PMID: 37352728
- PMCID: PMC10527515
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2023.107183
Tolerability of transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in children
Abstract
Objective: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a viable non-invasive method for mapping language networks. Little is known about the tolerability of transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in children.
Methods: Children aged 5-18 years underwent bilateral language mapping using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to target 33 sites/hemisphere. Stimulation was delivered at 5 Hz, in 1-2 second bursts, during visual naming and auditory verb generation. Pain unpleasantness and pain intensity were assessed using an unpleasantness visual analog scale (VAS).
Results: 49 participants tolerated motor mapping and had repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. 35/49 (71%) completed visual naming and 26/49 (53%) completed both visual naming and verb generation. Mean electrical field per participant was 115 V/m. Young age and lower language ability were associated with lower completion. Visual analogue scale scores were significantly higher (6.1 vs. 2.8) in participants who withdrew early compared to those who completed at least visual naming.
Conclusions: Pain measured by VAS was a major contributor to early withdrawal. However, a complete bilateral map was obtained with one paradigm in 71% of participants. Future studies designed to reduce pain during repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over language cortex will boost viability.
Significance: This study represents the first attempt to characterize tolerability of bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in healthy children.
Keywords: Repetitive TMS; Stimulation mapping; Transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Competing Interest None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to disclose.
Figures
References
-
- Babajani-Feremi A, Holder CM, Narayana S, Fulton SP, Choudhri AF, Boop FA, Wheless JW, 2018. Predicting postoperative language outcome using presurgical fMRI, MEG, TMS, and high gamma ECoG. Clin Neurophysiol 129, 560–571. - PubMed
-
- Babajani-Feremi A, Narayana S, Rezaie R, Choudhri AF, Fulton SP, Boop FA, Wheless JW, Papanicolaou AC, 2016. Language mapping using high gamma electrocorticography, fMRI, and TMS versus electrocortical stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 127, 1822–1836. - PubMed
-
- Braden AA, Weatherspoon SE, Boardman T, Williard T, Adkins A, Gibbs SK, Wheless JW, Narayana S, 2022. Image-guided TMS is safe in a predominately pediatric clinical population. Clin Neurophysiol 137, 193–206. - PubMed
-
- Cox RW, 1996. AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. Comput Biomed Res 29, 162–173. - PubMed
-
- Garvey MA, Ziemann U, Bartko JJ, Denckla MB, Barker CA, Wassermann EM, 2003. Cortical correlates of neuromotor development in healthy children. Clin Neurophysiol 114, 1662–1670. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
