Reliability of targeting methods in TMS for depression: Beam F3 vs. 5.5 cm.
Depression
F3
Neuroimaging
Neuronavigation
Prefrontal
TMS
Targeting
Journal
Brain stimulation
ISSN: 1876-4754
Titre abrégé: Brain Stimul
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101465726
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
06
01
2020
accepted:
13
01
2020
pubmed:
15
4
2020
medline:
28
11
2020
entrez:
15
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
No consensus exists in the clinical transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) field as to the best method for targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for depression treatment. Two common targeting methods are the Beam F3 method and the 5.5 cm rule. Evaluate the anatomical reliability of technician-identified DLPFC targets and obtain consensus average brain and scalp MNI152 coordinates. Three trained TMS technicians performed repeated targeting using both the Beam F3 method and 5.5 cm rule in ten healthy subjects (n = 162). Average target locations were plotted on 7T structural MRIs to compare inter- and intra-rater reliability, respectively. (1) Beam F3 inter- and intra-rater reliability was superior to 5.5 cm targeting (p = 0.0005 and 0.0035). (2) The average Beam F3 location was 2.6±1.0 cm anterolateral to the 5.5 cm method. Beam F3 targeting demonstrates greater precision and reliability than the 5.5 cm method and identifies a different anatomical target.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
No consensus exists in the clinical transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) field as to the best method for targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for depression treatment. Two common targeting methods are the Beam F3 method and the 5.5 cm rule.
OBJECTIVE
Evaluate the anatomical reliability of technician-identified DLPFC targets and obtain consensus average brain and scalp MNI152 coordinates.
METHODS
Three trained TMS technicians performed repeated targeting using both the Beam F3 method and 5.5 cm rule in ten healthy subjects (n = 162). Average target locations were plotted on 7T structural MRIs to compare inter- and intra-rater reliability, respectively.
RESULTS
(1) Beam F3 inter- and intra-rater reliability was superior to 5.5 cm targeting (p = 0.0005 and 0.0035). (2) The average Beam F3 location was 2.6±1.0 cm anterolateral to the 5.5 cm method.
CONCLUSIONS
Beam F3 targeting demonstrates greater precision and reliability than the 5.5 cm method and identifies a different anatomical target.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32289680
pii: S1935-861X(20)30014-0
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2020.01.010
pmc: PMC7507589
mid: NIHMS1623874
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
578-581Subventions
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : T32 MH019113
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCRR NIH HHS
ID : S10 RR028821
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR002537
Pays : United States
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : K12 NS098482
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : T32 GM108540
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest There are no conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
Références
Brain Stimul. 2015 Sep-Oct;8(5):965-73
pubmed: 26115776
Brain Stimul. 2016 May-Jun;9(3):336-346
pubmed: 27090022
J Clin Psychiatry. 2018 Jan/Feb;79(1):
pubmed: 28541649
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010 May;67(5):507-16
pubmed: 20439832
Brain Stimul. 2009 Jan;2(1):50-4
pubmed: 20539835
J Neurophysiol. 2011 Sep;106(3):1125-65
pubmed: 21653723
Biol Psychiatry. 2007 Dec 1;62(11):1208-16
pubmed: 17573044
Psychiatry Res. 2001 Nov 30;108(2):123-31
pubmed: 11738546
Psychiatry Res. 2011 Apr 30;186(2-3):232-8
pubmed: 20692709
Cereb Cortex. 2018 Sep 1;28(9):3095-3114
pubmed: 28981612