Shapes of direct cortical responses vs. short-range axono-cortical evoked potentials: The effects of direct electrical stimulation applied to the human brain.
Clotilde Turpin, Olivier Rossel, Félix Schlosser-Perrin, Sam Ng, Riki Matsumoto, Emmanuel Mandonnet, Hugues Duffau, François Bonnetblanc
{"title":"Shapes of direct cortical responses vs. short-range axono-cortical evoked potentials: The effects of direct electrical stimulation applied to the human brain.","authors":"Clotilde Turpin, Olivier Rossel, Félix Schlosser-Perrin, Sam Ng, Riki Matsumoto, Emmanuel Mandonnet, Hugues Duffau, François Bonnetblanc","doi":"10.1016/j.clinph.2024.10.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Direct cortical responses (DCR) and axono-cortical evoked potentials (ACEP) are generated by electrically stimulating the cortex either directly or indirectly through white matter pathways, potentially leading to different electrogenic processes. For ACEP, the slow conduction velocity of axons (median ≈ 4 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) is anticipated to induce a delay. For DCR, direct electrical stimulation (DES) of the cortex is expected to elicit additional cortical activity involving smaller and slower non-myelinated axons. We tried to validate these hypotheses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>DES was administered either directly on the cortex or to white matter fascicles within the resection cavity, while recording DCR or ACEP at the cortical level in nine patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Short but significant delays (≈ 2 ms) were measurable for ACEP immediately following the initial component (≈ 7 ms). Subsequent activities (≈ 40 ms) exhibited notable differences between DCR and ACEP, suggesting the presence of additional cortical activities for DCR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Distinctions between ACEPs and DCRs can be made based on a delay at the onset of early components and the dissimilarity in the shape of the later components (>40 ms after the DES artifact).</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>The comparison of different types of evoked potentials allows to better understand the effects of DES.</p>","PeriodicalId":10671,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neurophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neurophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2024.10.016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Direct cortical responses (DCR) and axono-cortical evoked potentials (ACEP) are generated by electrically stimulating the cortex either directly or indirectly through white matter pathways, potentially leading to different electrogenic processes. For ACEP, the slow conduction velocity of axons (median ≈ 4 m.s-1) is anticipated to induce a delay. For DCR, direct electrical stimulation (DES) of the cortex is expected to elicit additional cortical activity involving smaller and slower non-myelinated axons. We tried to validate these hypotheses.
Methods: DES was administered either directly on the cortex or to white matter fascicles within the resection cavity, while recording DCR or ACEP at the cortical level in nine patients.
Results: Short but significant delays (≈ 2 ms) were measurable for ACEP immediately following the initial component (≈ 7 ms). Subsequent activities (≈ 40 ms) exhibited notable differences between DCR and ACEP, suggesting the presence of additional cortical activities for DCR.
Conclusion: Distinctions between ACEPs and DCRs can be made based on a delay at the onset of early components and the dissimilarity in the shape of the later components (>40 ms after the DES artifact).
Significance: The comparison of different types of evoked potentials allows to better understand the effects of DES.
期刊介绍:
As of January 1999, The journal Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, and its two sections Electromyography and Motor Control and Evoked Potentials have amalgamated to become this journal - Clinical Neurophysiology.
Clinical Neurophysiology is the official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, the Brazilian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, the Czech Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, the Italian Clinical Neurophysiology Society and the International Society of Intraoperative Neurophysiology.The journal is dedicated to fostering research and disseminating information on all aspects of both normal and abnormal functioning of the nervous system. The key aim of the publication is to disseminate scholarly reports on the pathophysiology underlying diseases of the central and peripheral nervous system of human patients. Clinical trials that use neurophysiological measures to document change are encouraged, as are manuscripts reporting data on integrated neuroimaging of central nervous function including, but not limited to, functional MRI, MEG, EEG, PET and other neuroimaging modalities.