Motor Organization in Schizencephaly: Outcomes of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Diffusion Tensor Imaging of Motor Tract Projections Correlate with the Different Domains of Hand Function

Figure 1

TMS results in schizencephaly patients and schematic depiction of the motor tract. (a) Motor evoked potential (MEP) response rate during stimulation of the more-affected hemisphere; no ipsilateral MEP (iMEP) response was detected, and the contralateral MEP (cMEP) response rate was very low rate. (b) MEP response rate during stimulation of the less-affected hemisphere; whereas cMEP was detected in all three muscles, iMEP response tended to dominate in the distal muscle (FDI). (c) Latency of iMEP and cMEP during stimulation of the less-affected hemisphere. (d) Amplitude of iMEP and cMEP during stimulation of the less-affected hemisphere; the number on the graph indicates the relative ratio of the amplitudes of iMEP and cMEP for each muscle, relatively larger in FDI. (e) Similarity of the motor organization pattern between schizencephaly and large lesion in cerebral palsy defined by Staudt; more affected hemispheres were unable to induce MEP by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and less-affected hemispheres induced MEP by TMS in both nonparalytic and paralytic hands.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)