Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025

MRI-guided dmPFC-rTMS as a Treatment for Treatment-resistant Major Depressive Disorder
Published on: August 11, 2015
Variability in Motor Threshold during Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Treatment for Depression: Neurophysiological
Alexis Bourla1,2,3,4, Stéphane Mouchabac1,2, Léonard Lorimy4
1Department of Psychiatry, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, AP-HP, Sorbonne Université, 75012 Paris, France.
None:
The measurement of the motor threshold (MT) is an important element in determining stimulation intensity during Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation treatment (rTMS). The current recommendations propose its realization at least once a week. The variability in this motor threshold is an important factor to consider as it could translate certain neurophysiological specificities. We conducted a retrospective naturalistic study on data from 30 patients treated for treatment-resistant depression in an rTMS-specialized center. For each patient, weekly motor-evoked potential (MEP) was performed and several clinical elements were collected as part of our clinical interviews. Regarding response to treatment (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) before and after treatment), there was a mean difference of -8.88 (-21 to 0) in PHQ9 in the Theta Burst group, of -9.00 (-18 to -1) in the High-Frequency (10 Hz) group, and of -4.66 (-10 to +2) in the Low-Frequency (1 Hz) group. The mean improvement in depressive symptoms was 47% (p < 0.001, effect-size: 1.60). The motor threshold changed over the course of the treatment, with a minimum individual range of 1 point and a maximum of 19 points (total subset), and a greater concentration in the remission group (4 to 10) than in the other groups (3 to 10 in the response group, 1 to 8 in the partial response group, 3 to 19 in the stagnation group). We also note that the difference between MT at week 1 and week 6 was statistically significant only in the remission group, with a different evolutionary profile showing an upward trend in MT. Our findings suggest a potential predictive value of MT changes during treatment, particularly an increase in MT in patients who achieve remission and a distinct "break" in MT around the 4th week, which could predict nonresponse.
More Related Videos
09:30Treating Clinical Depression with Repetitive Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Using the Brainsway H1-coil
Published on: October 4, 2016
14:47Author Spotlight: Combined Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Controllable Pulse Parameter Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Probe Sensorimotor Control and Learning
Published on: April 21, 2023