Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil

Background: Electromagnetic forces in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coils generate a loud clicking sound that produces confounding auditory activation and is potentially hazardous to hearing. To reduce this noise while maintaining stimulation efficiency similar to conventional TMS coils, w...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: David L.K. Murphy, Lari M. Koponen, Eleanor Wood, Yiru Li, Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk, Stefan M. Goetz, Angel V. Peterchev
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2024-11-01
Series:Brain Stimulation
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935861X24001700
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850250585716031488
author David L.K. Murphy
Lari M. Koponen
Eleanor Wood
Yiru Li
Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk
Stefan M. Goetz
Angel V. Peterchev
author_facet David L.K. Murphy
Lari M. Koponen
Eleanor Wood
Yiru Li
Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk
Stefan M. Goetz
Angel V. Peterchev
author_sort David L.K. Murphy
collection DOAJ
description Background: Electromagnetic forces in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coils generate a loud clicking sound that produces confounding auditory activation and is potentially hazardous to hearing. To reduce this noise while maintaining stimulation efficiency similar to conventional TMS coils, we previously developed a quiet TMS double containment coil (qTMS-DCC). Objective: To compare the stimulation strength, perceived loudness, and EEG response between qTMS-DCC and a commercial TMS coil. Methods: Nine healthy volunteers participated in a within-subject study design. The resting motor thresholds (RMTs) for qTMS-DCC and MagVenture Cool-B65 were measured. Psychoacoustic titration matched the Cool-B65 loudness to qTMS-DCC pulsed at 80, 100, and 120 % RMT. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded for both coils. The psychoacoustic titration and ERPs were acquired with the coils both on and 6 cm off the scalp, the latter isolating the effects of airborne auditory stimulation from body sound and electromagnetic stimulation. The ERP comparisons focused on a centro-frontal region that encompassed peak responses in the global signal while stimulating the primary motor cortex. Results: RMT did not differ significantly between the coils, with or without the EEG cap on the head. qTMS-DCC was perceived to be substantially quieter than Cool-B65. For example, qTMS-DCC at 100 % coil-specific RMT sounded like Cool-B65 at 34 % RMT. The general ERP waveform and topography were similar between the two coils, as were early-latency components, indicating comparable electromagnetic brain stimulation in the on-scalp condition. qTMS- DCC had a significantly smaller P180 component in both on-scalp and off-scalp conditions, supporting reduced auditory activation. Conclusions: The stimulation efficiency of qTMS-DCC matched Cool-B65 while having substantially lower perceived loudness and auditory-evoked potentials.
format Article
id doaj-art-e887e93cc6644e04bdb0f9ca22fbe21b
institution OA Journals
issn 1935-861X
language English
publishDate 2024-11-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Brain Stimulation
spelling doaj-art-e887e93cc6644e04bdb0f9ca22fbe21b2025-08-20T01:58:08ZengElsevierBrain Stimulation1935-861X2024-11-011761197120710.1016/j.brs.2024.10.003Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coilDavid L.K. Murphy0Lari M. Koponen1Eleanor Wood2Yiru Li3Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk4Stefan M. Goetz5Angel V. Peterchev6Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USADepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USADepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USADepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USADepartment of Neurology, Duke University School of Medicine, USADepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Department of Engineering, Technical University Kaiserslautern, GermanyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, USA; Corresponding author. 40 Duke Medicine Circle, Box 3620 DUMC, Durham, NC 27710, USA.Background: Electromagnetic forces in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coils generate a loud clicking sound that produces confounding auditory activation and is potentially hazardous to hearing. To reduce this noise while maintaining stimulation efficiency similar to conventional TMS coils, we previously developed a quiet TMS double containment coil (qTMS-DCC). Objective: To compare the stimulation strength, perceived loudness, and EEG response between qTMS-DCC and a commercial TMS coil. Methods: Nine healthy volunteers participated in a within-subject study design. The resting motor thresholds (RMTs) for qTMS-DCC and MagVenture Cool-B65 were measured. Psychoacoustic titration matched the Cool-B65 loudness to qTMS-DCC pulsed at 80, 100, and 120 % RMT. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded for both coils. The psychoacoustic titration and ERPs were acquired with the coils both on and 6 cm off the scalp, the latter isolating the effects of airborne auditory stimulation from body sound and electromagnetic stimulation. The ERP comparisons focused on a centro-frontal region that encompassed peak responses in the global signal while stimulating the primary motor cortex. Results: RMT did not differ significantly between the coils, with or without the EEG cap on the head. qTMS-DCC was perceived to be substantially quieter than Cool-B65. For example, qTMS-DCC at 100 % coil-specific RMT sounded like Cool-B65 at 34 % RMT. The general ERP waveform and topography were similar between the two coils, as were early-latency components, indicating comparable electromagnetic brain stimulation in the on-scalp condition. qTMS- DCC had a significantly smaller P180 component in both on-scalp and off-scalp conditions, supporting reduced auditory activation. Conclusions: The stimulation efficiency of qTMS-DCC matched Cool-B65 while having substantially lower perceived loudness and auditory-evoked potentials.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935861X24001700TMSCoilHearingEEGTMS-Evoked potentialAuditory evoked potential
spellingShingle David L.K. Murphy
Lari M. Koponen
Eleanor Wood
Yiru Li
Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk
Stefan M. Goetz
Angel V. Peterchev
Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil
Brain Stimulation
TMS
Coil
Hearing
EEG
TMS-Evoked potential
Auditory evoked potential
title Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil
title_full Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil
title_fullStr Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil
title_full_unstemmed Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil
title_short Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil
title_sort reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet tms coil
topic TMS
Coil
Hearing
EEG
TMS-Evoked potential
Auditory evoked potential
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935861X24001700
work_keys_str_mv AT davidlkmurphy reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil
AT larimkoponen reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil
AT eleanorwood reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil
AT yiruli reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil
AT noreenbukhariparlakturk reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil
AT stefanmgoetz reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil
AT angelvpeterchev reducedauditoryperceptionandbrainresponsewithquiettmscoil