Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil

David L.K. Murphy, Lari M. Koponen, Eleanor Wood, Yiru Li, Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk, Stefan M. Goetz, Angel V. Peterchev*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1197-1207
Number of pages11
JournalBrain stimulation
Volume17
Issue number6
Early online date10 Oct 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2024

Bibliographical note

Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors

Keywords

  • Auditory evoked potential
  • Coil
  • EEG
  • Hearing
  • TMS
  • TMS-Evoked potential

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Neuroscience
  • Biophysics
  • Clinical Neurology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reduced auditory perception and brain response with quiet TMS coil'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this