Advertisement

Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Measure Cerebral Connectivity in Patients with Disorders of Consciousness

  • Melanie Boly
  • Olivia Gosseries
  • Marie-Aurélie Bruno
  • Mario Rosanova
  • Marcello Massimini
Chapter

Abstract

While the detection of voluntary signs at the patient’s bedside is considered sufficient to infer that the subject is conscious, their absence does not necessarily imply the absence of conscious perception. Recently, the development of new neuroimaging and electrophysiological active paradigms (where the patient has to mentally perform a task) allowed the detection of signs of consciousness in patients completely unable to move. However, in the case of a negative result, these two methods leave the question of the presence or absence of consciousness unanswered. In this chapter, we propose an additional level where consciousness can be studied using a combination of transcranial magnetic stimulation and EEG (TMS-EEG). This technique allows the direct stimulation of assemblies of cortical neurons and has been suggested as an efficient way to appreciate how the thalamocortical system can interact globally (integration) and produce specific responses (information).

Keywords

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Conscious Experience Brain Response Conscious Perception Stereotypical Response 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Giacino JT, Kalmar K, Whyte J. The JFK coma recovery scale-revised: measurement characteristics and diagnostic utility. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(12):2020–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gill-Thwaites H, Munday R. The sensory modality assessment and rehabilitation technique (SMART): a valid and reliable assessment for vegetative state and minimally conscious state patients. Brain Inj. 2004;18(12):1255–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kalmar K, Giacino JT. The JFK coma recovery scale–revised. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2005;15(3–4):454–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shiel A, Horn SA, Wilson BA, et al. The wessex head injury matrix (WHIM) main scale: a preliminary report on a scale to assess and monitor patient recovery after severe head injury. Clin Rehabil. 2000;14(4):408–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Laureys S, Owen AM, Schiff ND. Brain function in coma, vegetative state, and related disorders. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3(9):537–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state (1). N Engl J Med. 1994;330(21):1499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giacino JT, Ashwal S, Childs N, et al. The minimally conscious state: definition and diagnostic criteria. Neurology. 2002;58(3):349–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schnakers C, Perrin F, Schabus M, et al. Detecting consciousness in a total locked-in syndrome: an active event-related paradigm. Neurocase. 2009;15(4):271–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boly M, Coleman MR, Davis MH, et al. When thoughts become action: an fMRI paradigm to study volitional brain activity in non-communicative brain injured patients. Neuroimage. 2007;36(3):979–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Monti MM, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Coleman MR, et al. Willful modulation of brain activity in disorders of consciousness. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(7):579–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Owen AM, Coleman MR, Boly M, et al. Detecting awareness in the vegetative state. Science. 2006;313(5792):1402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Giacino JT, Hirsch J, Schiff N, Laureys S. Functional neuroimaging applications for assessment and rehabilitation planning in patients with disorders of consciousness. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87(12):67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Massimini M, Boly M, Casali A, et al. A perturbational approach for evaluating the brain’s capacity for consciousness. Prog Brain Res. 2009;177:201–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tononi G. Consciousness as integrated information: a provisional manifesto. Biol Bull. 2008;215(3):216–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Massimini M, Ferrarelli F, Huber R, et al. Breakdown of cortical effective connectivity during sleep. Science. 2005;309(5744):2228–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Massimini M, Ferrarelli F, Esser SK, et al. Triggering sleep slow waves by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104(20):8496–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ferrarelli F, Massimini M, Sarasso S, et al. Breakdown in cortical effective connectivity during midazolam-induced loss of consciousness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107(6):2681–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alkire MT, Hudetz AG, Tononi G. Consciousness and anesthesia. Science. 2008;322(5903):876–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tononi G, Massimini M. Why does consciousness fade in early sleep? Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1129:330–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boly M, Massimini M, Tononi G. Theoretical approaches to the diagnosis of altered states of consciousness. Prog Brain Res. 2009;177:383–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Casarotto S, Romero Lauro LJ, Bellina V, et al. EEG responses to TMS are sensitive to changes in the perturbation parameters and repeatable over time. PLoS One. 2010;5(4):10281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rosanova M, Casali A, Bellina V, et al. Natural frequencies of human corticothalamic circuits. J Neurosci. 2009;29(24):7679–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Melanie Boly
    • 1
  • Olivia Gosseries
    • 1
  • Marie-Aurélie Bruno
    • 1
  • Mario Rosanova
    • 2
  • Marcello Massimini
    • 2
  1. 1.Coma Science Group, Research Cyclotron CenterUniversity of LiègeLiègeBelgium
  2. 2.Physiology DepartmentUniversity of MilanMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations