Search

Your search keyword '"Bares, Martin"' showing total 243 results
Start Over Author "Bares, Martin"
243 results on '"Bares, Martin"'

3. Endemic parkinsonism: clusters, biology and clinical features

Author

Menšíková, Katerina, Steele, John C., Rosales, Raymond, Colosimo, Carlo, Spencer, Peter, Lannuzel, Annie, Ugawa, Yoshikazu, Sasaki, Ryogen, Giménez-Roldán, Santiago, Matej, Radoslav, Tuckova, Lucie, Hrabos, Dominik, Kolarikova, Kristyna, Vodicka, Radek, Vrtel, Radek, Strnad, Miroslav, Hlustik, Petr, Otruba, Pavel, Prochazka, Martin, Bares, Martin, Boluda, Susana, Buee, Luc, Ransmayr, Gerhard, and Kaňovský, Petr

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. Reply to: Questioning the cycad theory of Kii ALS–PDC causation

Author

Menšíková, Katerina, Rosales, Raymond, Colosimo, Carlo, Spencer, Peter, Lannuzel, Annie, Ugawa, Yoshikazu, Sasaki, Ryogen, Giménez-Roldán, Santiago, Matej, Radoslav, Tuckova, Lucie, Hrabos, Dominik, Kolarikova, Kristyna, Vodicka, Radek, Vrtel, Radek, Strnad, Miroslav, Hlustik, Petr, Otruba, Pavel, Prochazka, Martin, Bares, Martin, Boluda, Susana, Buee, Luc, Ransmayr, Gerhard, and Kaňovský, Petr

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

27. Corrigendum: RAFF-4, Magnetization Transfer and Diffusion Tensor MRI of Lysophosphatidylcholine Induced Demyelination and Remyelination in Rats

Author

Holikova, Klara, primary, Laakso, Hanne, additional, Salo, Raimo, additional, Shatillo, Artem, additional, Nurmi, Antti, additional, Bares, Martin, additional, Vanicek, Jiri, additional, Michaeli, Shalom, additional, Mangia, Silvia, additional, Sierra, Alejandra, additional, and Gröhn, Olli, additional

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

30. Neurostimulation Methods in the Treatment of Depression: A Comparison of rTMS, tDCS, and Venlafaxine Using a Pooled Analysis of Two Studies

Author

Hejzlar,Martin, Novak,Tomas, Bares,Martin, Hejzlar,Martin, Novak,Tomas, and Bares,Martin

Abstract

Martin Hejzlar,1,2 Tomas Novak,1,2 Martin Bares1,2 1NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Klecany, Czech Republic; 2Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Third Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech RepublicCorrespondence: Martin HejzlarNational Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, 250 67, Czech RepublicTel +420 283 088 314Email Martin.Hejzlar@nudz.czBackground: There are no head-to-head studies comparing the antidepressant effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). This pooled analysis compared indirectly the antidepressant efficacy and acceptability of rTMS, tDCS, and the antidepressant venlafaxine (VNF) extended-release.Methods: The analysis (n=117, both patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and non-TRD were included) examined pooled data from two 4-week, single-centered, two-armed, double-blind, randomized studies (EUDRACT n. 2005-000826-22 and EUDRACT n. 2015-001639-19). The antidepressant efficacy of right-sided low-frequency rTMS (n=29) vs VNF (n=31) and left-sided anodal tDCS (n=29) vs VNF (n=28) was evaluated. The primary outcome was a change in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score from baseline to the treatment endpoint at week 4. The response was defined as a ≥ 50% reduction in the MADRS score and remission as the MADRS score ≤ 10 points, both were calculated for the primary treatment endpoint at week 4.Results: Mean change in total MADRS scores from baseline to week 4 was 7.0 (95% CI, 4.8– 9.1) points in the rTMS group, 7.6 (95% CI, 5.5– 9.8) in the tDCS group, and 8.9 (95% CI, 7.4– 10.4) among patients in the VNF group, a non-significant difference (F(2111)=0.62, p=0.54). Similarly, neither the response rates nor remission rates for rTMS (response 31%; remission 17%), tDCS (24%, 17%), or VNF (41%

Published
2021

34. Abnormalities of cortical excitability and cortical inhibition in cervical dystonia; Evidence from somatosensory evoked potentials and paired transcranial magnetic stimulation recordings

Author

KaAovsky, Petr, Bares, Martin, Streitova, Hana, Klajblova, Hana, Daniel, Pavel, and Rektor, Ivan

Subjects
Dystonia -- Risk factors, Dystonia -- Research, Magnetic brain stimulation -- Usage, Evoked potentials (Electrophysiology) -- Research, Health
Abstract

Byline: Petr KaAovsky (1), Martin Bares (1), Hana Streitova (1), Hana Klajblova (1), Pavel Daniel (1), Ivan Rektor (1) Keywords: Key words cervical dystonia; cortical excitability; cortical inhibition; somatosensory evoked potentials; transcranial magnetic stimulation Abstract: Cortical excitability and cortico-cortical inhibition were examined in twenty-one patients suffering from idiopathic rotational cervical dystonia. Polymyography of cervical muscles, somatosensory evoked potential recordings, and paired transcranial magnetic stimulation were used to assess the dystonic disorder. The results were compared with those obtained in a group of sixteen healthy age-matched volunteers. Statistically significant differences between the patient group and the control group were found when the amplitude values of the mean P22/N30 component measured at F [3, 4] and C[3, 4]' electrode positions were compared. The mean amplitude of P22/N30 in both of these electrode positions contralaterally to the direction of head deviation was significantly higher in the patient group (p a$? 0.05). The mean side-to-side P22/N30 amplitude ratio was calculated in both groups in the F[3, 4] and C[3, 4]' electrode positions: there was a significant difference between the two groups. The mean ratio (calculated contralaterally/ipsilaterally in the patient group and left/right side in the control group) was significantly higher in the patient group (p a$? 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between the two groups when the mean values of MEP amplitudes following paired stimuli at short and medium interstimulus intervals (ISI)) were compared. The percentage of amplitude reduction registered at short ISI was significantly lower in the patient group when both 3 ms ISI and 5 ms ISI were considered, and when the hemisphere contralateral to the direction of head deviation was stimulated. There was also a difference (with the short ISI) when the hemisphere ipsilateral to the direction of head deviation was stimulated, but this difference was not significant (p &lt 0.5). Almost all of the amplitude changes following the paired stimulus at the longer ISI, i. e. 10, 15, and 20 ms were significantly different when the patient group was compared with control group: when the ipsilateral hemisphere was stimulated, the amplitude of conditioned responses was significantly higher following all three paired stimuli (with 10, 15, and 20 ms ISI) at the p a$? 0.05 significance level when the contralateral hemisphere was stimulated, they were significantly higher following the 10 and 20 ms ISI paired stimuli (significance level p a$? 0.05). The interhemispheric difference in the patient group was significant only for the paired stimuli using 3 and 5 ms (short) ISI and 15 and 20 ms (medium) ISI. There was a significantly decreased inhibition at 3 and 5 ms ISI when the hemisphere contralateral to the direction of head deviation was stimulated, as compared with the hemisphere ipsilateral (p a$? 0.05). Similarly, there was a significantly increased facilitation at 15 and 20 ms when the hemisphere contralateral to the direction of head deviation was stimulated, as compared with the hemisphere ipsilateral (p a$? 0.05). The results indicate that a disorder of both cortical excitability and intracortical inhibition exists in patients with cervical dystonia, and that this disorder is lateralized, i. e. it is located within the hemisphere contralateral to the direction of head deviation. Author Affiliation: (1) 1st Department of Neurology, Masaryk University, St. Anne Hospital, PekaAska 53, 656 91 Brno, Czech Republic. pkanov@med.muni.cz or: petr.kanovsky@fnusa.cz, CZ Article note: Received: 5 March 2002, Received in revised form: 1 August 2002, Accepted: 2 August 2002 Correspondence to Doc. MUDr Petr KaAovsky, CSc.

Published
2003

47. Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) Versus Venlafaxine ER In The Treatment Of Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Single-Center Study With Open-Label, Follow-Up

Author

Bares,Martin, Brunovsky,Martin, Stopkova,Pavla, Hejzlar,Martin, Novak,Tomas, Bares,Martin, Brunovsky,Martin, Stopkova,Pavla, Hejzlar,Martin, and Novak,Tomas

Abstract

Martin Bares,1,2 Martin Brunovsky,1,2 Pavla Stopkova,1,2 Martin Hejzlar,1,2 Tomas Novak1,2 1NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech Republic; 2The Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech RepublicCorrespondence: Martin BaresNational Institute of Mental Health, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech RepublicTel +4 202 6600 3330Fax +4 202 8308 8420Email martin.bares@nudz.czObjective: Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS), a relatively new neuromodulation approach, provides some evidence of an antidepressant effect. This randomized, 4-week, double-blind study with 8-week, open-label, follow-up compared the efficacy and tolerability of left anodal tDCS with venlafaxine ER (VNF) in the treatment of depression and prevention of early relapse.Methods: Subjects (n = 57) received tDCS (2 mA, 20 sessions, 30 mins) plus placebo (n = 29) or VNF plus sham tDCS (n = 28). Responders to both interventions entered the open-label follow-up. The primary outcome was score change in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) at week 4 of the study. Secondary outcomes were response, remission, dropout rates and relapse rates within the follow-up.The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline to week for patients treated with tDCS was 7.69 (95% CI, 5.09–10.29) points and 9.64 (95% CI, 6.20–13.09) points for patients from the VNF group, a nonsignificant difference (1.95, 95% CI −2.25–6.16; t (55) = 0.93, p= 0.36, Cohen´s d = 0.24). There were no significant between-group differences in the MADRS scores from baseline to endpoint (intention-to-treat analysis). The response/remission rate for tDCS (24%/17%) and VNF (43%/32%) as well as the dropout rate (tDCS/VNF; 6/6) did not differ significantly between groups. In the follow-up, relapse (tDCS/VNF; 1/2) and dropout (tDCS/VNF; 2/3) rat

Published
2019

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results