Comparison of TMS and DTT for predicting motor outcome in intracerebral hemorrhage

BackgroundTMS (transcranial magnetic stimulation) and DTT (diffusion tensor tractography) have different advantages in evaluating stroke patients. TMS has good clinical accessibility and economical benefit. On the contrary, DTT has a unique advantage to visualize neural tracts three-dimensionally although it requires an expensive and large MRI machine. Many studies have demonstrated that TMS and DTT have predictive values for motor outcome in stroke patients. However, there has been no study on the comparison of these two evaluation tools. In the current study, we compared the abilities of TMS and DTT to predict upper motor outcome in patients with ICH (intracerebral hemorrhage).MethodsFifty-three consecutive patients with severe motor weakness were evaluated by TMS and DTT at the early stage (7–28 days) of ICH. Modified Brunnstrom classification (MBC) and the motricity index of upper extremity (UMI) were evaluated at onset and 6 months after onset.ResultsPatients with the presence of a motor evoked potential (MEP) in TMS or a preserved corticospinal tract (CST) in DTT showed better motor outcomes than those without (p = 0.000). TMS showed higher positive predictive value than DTT. In contrast, DTT showed higher negative predictive value than TMS.ConclusionsTMS and DTT had different advantages in predicting motor outcome, and this result could be a reference to predict final neurological deficit at the early stage of ICH.