Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40153104›Full record

ArticleBrain topography2025

Stimulation Parameters Recruit Distinct Cortico-Cortical Pathways: Insights from Microstate Analysis on TMS-Evoked Potentials.

Delia Lucarelli, Giacomo Guidali, Dominika Sulcova, Agnese Zazio, Natale Salvatore Bonfiglio, Antonietta Stango, Guido Barchiesi, Marta Bortoletto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain topography, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Clinical utility and prospective of TMS-EEG: Updated review from an international expert group.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Delia Lucarelli *Neurophysiology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Giacomo Guidali *Department of Psychology and Milan Center for Neuroscience - Neuromi, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy.
Dominika SulcovaInstitute for Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Agnese ZazioNeurophysiology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Natale Salvatore BonfiglioStatistical service, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Antonietta StangoNeurophysiology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Guido BarchiesiDepartment of Philosophy, University of Milano, Milano, Italy.
Marta BortolettoNeurophysiology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy. marta.bortoletto@imtlucca.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked potentials (TEPs) represent an innovative measure for examining brain connectivity and developing biomarkers of psychiatric conditions. Minimizing TEP variability across studies and participants, which may stem from methodological choices, is therefore vital. By combining classic peak analysis and microstate investigation, we tested how TMS pulse waveform and current direction may affect cortico-cortical circuit engagement when targeting the primary motor cortex (M1). We aim to disentangle whether changing these parameters affects the degree of activation of the same neural circuitry or may lead to changes in the pathways through which the induced activation spreads. Thirty-two healthy participants underwent a TMS-EEG experiment in which the pulse waveform (monophasic, biphasic) and current direction (posterior-anterior, anterior-posterior, latero-medial) were manipulated. We assessed the latency and amplitude of M1-TEP components and employed microstate analyses to test differences in topographies. Results revealed that TMS parameters strongly influenced M1-TEP components' amplitude but had a weaker role over their latencies. Microstate analysis showed that the current direction in monophasic stimulations changed the pattern of evoked microstates at the early TEP latencies, as well as their duration and global field power. This study shows that the current direction of monophasic pulses may modulate cortical sources contributing to TEP signals, activating neural populations and cortico-cortical paths more selectively. Biphasic stimulation reduces the variability associated with current direction and may be better suited when TMS targeting is blind to anatomical information.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, MotorMotor CortexTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdultElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleNeural PathwaysYoung AdultConnectivityCurrent directionMicrostatesMotor cortexPulse waveformTMS-EEGTMS-evoked potentials

Identifiers

PMID40153104
PMCPMC11953218

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.