Transcranial magnetic stimulation as a diagnostic and prognostic test in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-510X(95)00056-8Get rights and content

Abstract

Corticospinal stimulus conduction was investigated after transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex in 63 patients (20 female, 43 male, 59 ± 12 years) with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and progressive bulbar palsy. Recordings were made bilaterally from the Abductor digiti minimi muscle (ADM) in the hand and the Tibialis anterior muscle (TA) in the leg. Thirteen patients were re-examined after 250 ± 125 days. Eight patients were examined a third time after 552 ± 165 days. At the first investigation central motor conduction time was abnormal to one or more target muscles in 51% (n = 32) of all patients. No significant delay in CMCT developed during follow-up. The average time of survival of patients with normal CMCT at the first investigation was 16.5 ± 7.5 months, and 14.7 ± 8.8 months in patients with abnormal CMCT. This is not a significant difference. It is therefore concluded that transcranial magnetic stimulation is not a sensitive tool in the diagnosis of ALS. Furthermore, CMCT does not provide significant prognostic information.

References (22)

  • BensimonG. et al.

    A controlled trial of Riluzole in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

    New Engl. J. Med.

    (1994)
  • BerardelliA. et al.

    Electrical and magnetic transcranial stimulation in patients with corticospinal damage due to stroke or motor neurone disease

    Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol.

    (1991)
  • BruynG.W.
  • ClausD.

    Central motor conduction: methods and normal results

    Muscle Nerve

    (1990)
  • ClausD. et al.

    Central motor conduction in degenerative ataxic disorders

    A magnetic stimulation study

    J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat.

    (1988)
  • ClausD. et al.

    Corticospinal conduction studied with magnetic double stimulation in the intact human

    J. Neurol. Sci.

    (1992)
  • ClausD. et al.

    Central motor conduction time to upper versus lower extremities

  • EisenA. et al.

    Cortical excitability in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a clue to pathogenesis

    J. Can. Sci. Neurol.

    (1993)
  • EisenA. et al.

    Cortical magnetic stimulation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

    Muscle Nerve

    (1990)
  • HessC.W. et al.

    Magnetic brain stimulation: Central motor conduction studies in multiple sclerosis

    Ann. Neurol.

    (1987)
  • HiranoA. et al.

    A review of the pathologic findings in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

  • Cited by (67)

    • Central motor conduction time reveals upper motor neuron involvement masked by lower motor neuron impairment in a significant portion of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

      2020, Clinical Neurophysiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Based on these findings, we conclude that the age almost had no influence on the present results for CMCT prolongation in ALS. Prolongation of CMCT in patients with ALS has also been reported previously (Bartousek et al., 1993, Claus et al., 1995, Mills and Nithi, 1998, Schriefer et al., 1989). The CMCT includes the time required for activation of the motor cortical neurons (synaptic delay and utility time), conduction time through the corticospinal tract (CST) from the cortex to the spinal cord, the time for motor neuron activation in the spinal cord (Udupa and Chen, 2013), and the conduction time through the most-proximal part of the peripheral motor nerve within the spinal canal.

    • Motor-evoked potential gain is a helpful test for the detection of corticospinal tract dysfunction in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

      2017, Clinical Neurophysiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, under these same conditions, MEP gain could discriminate between the two groups. MEP parameters, such as area or amplitude, are not sufficiently sensitive to monitor disease-induced changes (Claus et al., 1995; de Carvalho et al., 1999; Zanette et al., 2002; Mills, 2003). It was suggested to normalize the MEP amplitude by the amplitude of CMAP (de Carvalho et al., 2005), but its sensitivity remains low in ALS (Pouget et al., 2000; Attarian et al., 2005, 2006, 2007).

    • Magnetic Stimulation

      2015, Neurophysiologie-Labor
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This work was supported by the Wilhelm Sander Foundation

    View full text