The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Mc b70

Manufactured by MagVenture
Sourced in Denmark, Germany

The MC-B70 is a magnetic stimulation coil designed for use with TMS (Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation) systems. It is a circular coil that generates a magnetic field for the purpose of eliciting neural responses in the brain.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

8 protocols using mc b70

1

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Motor Cortex

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
TMS was applied with a MagPro X100 stimulator (MagVenture A/S, Farum, Denmark) and a figure-of-eight coil (MC-B70). Pulses were biphasic with an anterior-posterior followed by posterior-anterior current direction in the brain. The coil was placed tangentially to the scalp on top of the EEG cap (Easycap, BrainProducts, Gilching, Germany) with the handle in posterior direction orienting 45° away from the midline. Neuronavigation (Brain Voyager, Brain Innovation B.V., Maastricht, The Netherlands) was used to ensure stability of target point stimulation throughout the session. A single pulse based cortical mapping procedure was applied over left M1 to determine the hotspot for TMS-induced muscle twitches of the FDI muscle from the dominant right hand. Single pulse TMS intensity was set at 120% of the individual rMT, defined as the lowest intensity necessary to induce an MEP with a greater peak-to-peak amplitude than 0.05 mV in 50% of the trials (five out of ten). TMS was applied manually with a minimum of seven seconds between single pulses.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Measuring Motor Cortical Excitability with TMS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In order to test for differences in motor cortical excitability we obtained individual resting and active motor thresholds (RMT and AMT, respectively) for the right abductor pollicis brevis (APB) muscle, applying single biphasic pulses over the left motor hot spot (Magpro X100 stimulator, MagVenture, Skovlunde, Denmark, figure-of-eight coil MC-B70). The coil was placed over the hot spot of left motor cortex with the handle pointing backward and laterally at a 45° angle to the sagittal plane. First upstroke of the induced biphasic current in the brain was antero-posterior. Resting motor threshold (RMT) was defined as the lowest stimulus intensity that elicited at least six responses ≥50 µV within 10 consecutive single pulses (cf. [17] (link)). Active motor threshold (AMT) was defined as the lowest stimulus intensity that elicited a response ≥200 µV averaged from 10 consecutive single pulses during voluntary contraction (10% of maximum force, online measured and visualized as average of a quadratic mean amplitude, based on [18] ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

rPMS-Assisted Motor Imagery for Neurorehabilitation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Participants in the MI + rPMS group were provided with rPMS on the right forearm during the MI task. rPMS targeted the right extensor carpi radialis longus, and the motor points were identified by repetitive stimulation to determine the location and orientation of the PMS coil during MI. We placed the coil on the right extensor carpi radialis longus with the handle facing the proximal part (i.e., the upper arm) at an angle of 45° to the forearm (Figure 2). rPMS was provided using a magnetic stimulation machine (MagPro R20; MagVenture, Inc., Farum, Denmark) and an rPMS coil (MC-B70; MagVenture, Inc., Farum, Denmark). The rPMS coil used in this study was a figure-eight coil. The inner and outer diameters of this coil are 27 mm and 97 mm, respectively, with a pulse width of 280 μs. The stimulation frequency, stimulation duration, and stimulation intensity was set to 20 Hz [39 (link)], 5 s, and 1.2 times the motor threshold [3 (link)], respectively. The motor threshold was the minimum intensity at which the muscle contracted upon stimulation and was visually assessed by two examiners [32 (link)]. rPMS induced dorsiflexion of the wrist joint during stimulation.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Quantifying E-Field Prediction Accuracy

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To further evaluate the performance of the predicted E-field maps, we computed the distance between peaks of the predicted and reference E-field magnitude. Similar to TOC, we computed the E-field peak distance (EPD) in both the volume and the surface space, respectively, using the following definition
EPD=Peak(EP)Peak(ER),
where EP and ER denote the predicted and reference E-field and Peak() obtains the coordinate of the voxel at the gray matter region or the vertex at brain surface with the maximum magnitude. To reduce the influence of outliers on EPD in the volume space, we took the average value of the E-field magnitude in 3x3x3 neighboring voxels within the gray matter region as magnitude of a voxel to determine the location of the peak value of E-field maps for Magstim-70mm-Fig8 and MagVenture-MC-B70 coils. For the less focal E-field distributions corresponding to the Magstim-70mm-circular coil, the location of the target was determined as the average position of the top 200 voxels with the highest E-field magnitude in the gray-matter region.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Determining Optimal M1 Hotspot for TMS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In order to determine the right M1 hot-spot, motor-evoked potentials of the left fore-arm muscles were elicited by single TMS pulses delivered with a standard figure-of-eight coil (MC-B70, MagPro Stimulator, MagVenture, Willich, Germany). The coil was held tangentially to the scalp with the handle pointing backward and laterally at an angle of about 45° away from the midline. The coil was positioned over the M1 hand area to elicit motor responses. By moving the coil in 0.5 cm steps anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral to this area, the exact localization of the area which evoked the maximal motor response was determined. This location was marked on the scalp with a pen and used for positioning of the tDCS electrode.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Exploring Intracortical Circuits with TMS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
TMS was delivered with a figure-of-eight coil (MC-B70 with outer diameter of each wing 97 mm) connected to a biphasic MagPro X100 system (MagVenture, Skovlunde, DK) over the left motor cortex to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) at the right FDI muscle.25 (link) Resting motor threshold (RMT) and active motor threshold (AMT) were determined according to standard procedures.26 (link)Facilitatory circuits were evaluated by the intracortical facilitation (ICF) and the short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF) protocols, while inhibitory circuits by SICI, long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) and CSP.27 (link)SICI–ICF, SICF and LICI were studied with a paired-pulse model with a conditioning-test design. For all paradigms, the test stimulus (TS) was adjusted to evoke an MEP of 1 mV amplitude. The interstimulus interval (ISI) between TS and conditioning stimulation differed among protocols (see Supplementary Data and Table 1). Fifteen trials were recorded for each ISI and each protocol randomly intermixed with 15 trials of TS alone (0.2 Hz ± 10%). The ratio of the mean amplitude of the conditioned response to that of the TS response (unconditioned response) was calculated for each condition and ISI in each subject.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Localization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The left dPMC was localized using a neuronavigation system (LOCALITE, Sankt Augustin, Germany). The target area was pre-defined by Talairach coordinates −29, 5, 47 (x, y, z) corresponding to Brodmann area 6.
To ensure that the target area for stimulation was sufficiently separated from the left M1, the cortical representation of the right first dorsal interosseus (FDI) muscle was localized using single pulse TMS. To this end, a standard figure of eight coil (MC-B70) connected to a MagPro stimulator (Mag Venture, Hückelhoven, Germany) was placed tangentially to the scalp to trigger motor-evoked potentials (MEP). The area evoking the largest motor response was defined as motor hot spot. In two sessions, M1 localization was not possible. The mean distance between M1 hot spot and the PMC target area was 5.11 ± 0.13 cm (sham), 5.08 ± 0.20 cm (anodal) and 4.89 ± 0.21 cm (cathodal). The distance did not differ significantly between sessions (F(2, 30) = 0.456, p = 0.638).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Biphasic TMS for Lower Limb Motor Cortex Stimulation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Biphasic TMS pulses were delivered by a figure-of-eight coil, specifically designed to stimulate lower limb motor cortical area (MC-B70, MagVenture), and produced by a MagPro R30 Stimulator (MagVenture). During the whole experiment, pulses were biphasic with the current flowing in the coil in an anterior-posterior/posterior-anterior direction. The coil was held so that the figure-of-eight was oriented perpendicularly to the interhemispheric fissure, with the center of the coil placed over the left hemisphere a few centimeters lateral of the vertex. The position was adjusted in order to elicit the biggest MEP possible in VL (around 40% Mmax amplitude). The position of the coil was drawn on a swimming cap to ensure an identical position of the coil throughout the whole experiment. TMS intensity was set to elicit the biggest MEP possible during VATMS measurements (90–100% maximal stimulator output (MSO), identical intensity during the whole experiment) and a second intensity was used to produce MEPs equal to 10–20% Mmax amplitude during 10% MVC. The intensity was then kept constant during the whole experiment.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!