Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex attenuates pain perception in complex regional pain syndrome type I

Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord, roots and peripheral nerves: Basic principles and procedures for routine clinical and research application. An updated report from an I.F.C.N. Committee

These guidelines provide an up-date of previous IFCN report on “Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application” (Rossini et al., 1994). A new Committee, composed of international experts, some of whom were in the panel of the 1994 “Report”, was selected to produce a current state-of-the-art review of non-invasive stimulation both for clinical application and research in neuroscience.

Since 1994, the international scientific community has seen a rapid increase in non-invasive brain stimulation in studying cognition, brain–behavior relationship and pathophysiology of various neurologic and psychiatric disorders. New paradigms of stimulation and new techniques have been developed. Furthermore, a large number of studies and clinical trials have demonstrated potential therapeutic applications of non-invasive brain stimulation, especially for TMS. Recent guidelines can be found in the literature covering specific aspects of non-invasive brain stimulation, such as safety (Rossi et al., 2009), methodology (Groppa et al., 2012) and therapeutic applications (Lefaucheur et al., 2014).

This up-dated review covers theoretical, physiological and practical aspects of non-invasive stimulation of brain, spinal cord, nerve roots and peripheral nerves in the light of more updated knowledge, and include some recent extensions and developments.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in chronic pain: a review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on the analgesic effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in chronic pain according to different pain syndromes and stimulation parameters.

DATA SOURCES

Publications on rTMS and chronic pain were searched in PubMed and Google Scholar using the following key words: chronic pain, analgesia, transcranial magnetic stimulation, neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and complex regional pain syndrome.

STUDY SELECTION

This review only included double-blind, controlled studies with >10 participants in each arm that were published from 1996 to 2014 and written in English. Studies with relevant information for the understanding of the effects of rTMS were also cited.

DATA EXTRACTION

The following data were retained: type of pain syndrome, type of study, coil type, target, stimulation intensity, frequency, number of pulses, orientation of induced current, number of session, and a brief summary of intervention outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 33 randomized trials were found. Many studies reported significant pain relief by rTMS, especially high-frequency stimulation over the primary motor cortex performed in consecutive treatment sessions. Pain relief was frequently >30% compared with control treatment. Neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and complex regional pain syndrome were the pain syndromes more frequently studied. However, among all published studies, only a few performed repetitive sessions of rTMS.

CONCLUSIONS

rTMS has potential utility in the management of chronic pain; however, studies using maintenance sessions of rTMS and assessing the effects of rTMS on the different aspects of chronic pain are needed to provide a more solid basis for its clinical application for pain relief.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of chronic orofacial pain

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is non-invasive neuromodulation method. We applied rTMS for the treatment of farmacoresistant chronic orofacial pain. We compared the effect of 10 Hz and 20 Hz stimulation. The study included 23 patients for 20 Hz stimulation and 36 patients for 10 Hz stimulation with pharmacotherapy resistant chronic facial pain aged 33-65 years with pain duration of at least 6 months. Monitoring of treatment effects was performed within 15 minutes of each rTMS application (days 1-5) and finally stimulation (active vs. sham coil). If compared with data with 10 Hz rTMS study (n=36) and with 20 Hz rTMS (n=23) trials using a parallel design. Only the results obtained in a series of five rTMS treatments in the first step (active n=24, sham n=12), that 20 Hz frequency rTMS using a higher intensity (95 % of motor threshold) to be equally effective relative to VAS (Visual analogue scale) and QST (quantitative sensory testing). In conclusions, the better results with the relief of orofacial pain were obtained with 20 Hz stimulation if compared with 10 Hz stimulation. It was proved with subjective (VAS) and objective evaluation (QST). rTMS can be used in the treatment of chronic intractable pain.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in neuropathic pain secondary to malignancy: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Significant analgesic effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have been found in several studies of patients with chronic pain of various origins, but never for malignancy. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of 10 sessions of rTMS over the primary motor cortex (M1) in patients suffering from malignant neuropathic pain.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients were randomly allocated into one of two groups to receive real (20 Hz, 10 s, 10 trains with 80% intensity) or sham rTMS daily for 10 consecutive days. Patients were evaluated using a verbal descriptor scale (VDS), a visual analogue scale (VAS), Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs (LANSS) and Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAM-D) at baseline, after the first, fifth and 10th treatment sessions, and then 15 days and 1 month after treatment.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between real and sham groups in the duration of illness or pain rating scores at the baseline. A significant 'Time × Group' interaction was recorded indicating that real and sham rTMS had different effects on the VDS, VAS, LANSS and HAM-D scales. Post-hoc testing showed that the group of patients treated with real rTMS had greater improvement in all scales that persisted up to 15 days, but were not present 1 month later. Significant positive correlations between the percentage of pain reduction and HAM-D after the 10th session and 15 days later were recorded.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate that 10 rTMS sessions over the M1 can induce short-term pain relief in malignant neuropathic pain.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation for chronic pain

Current data suggest that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has the potential to be an effective and complimentary treatment modality for patients with chronic neuropathic pain syndromes. The success of TMS for pain relief depends on the parameters of the stimulation delivered, the location of neural target, and duration of treatment. TMS can be used to excite or inhibit underlying neural tissue that depends on long-term potentiation and long-term depression, respectively. Long-term randomized controlled studies are warranted to establish the efficacy of repetitive TMS in patients with various chronic pain syndromes.

Neurochemical analysis of primary motor cortex in chronic low back pain

The involvement of the primary motor cortex (M1) in chronic low back pain (LBP) is a relatively new concept. Decreased M1 excitability and an analgesic effect after M1 stimulation have been recently reported. However, the neurochemical changes underlying these functional M1 changes are unknown. The current study investigated whether neurochemicals specific to neurons and glial cells in both right and left M1 are altered. N-Acetylaspartate (NAA) and myo-inositol (mI) were measured with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in 19 subjects with chronic LBP and 14 healthy controls. We also examined correlations among neurochemicals within and between M1 and relationships between neurochemical concentrations and clinical features of pain. Right M1 NAA was lower in subjects with LBP compared to controls (p = 0.008). Left M1 NAA and mI were not significantly different between LBP and control groups. Correlations between neurochemical concentrations across M1s were different between groups (p = 0.008). There were no significant correlations between M1 neurochemicals and pain characteristics. These findings provide preliminary evidence of neuronal depression and altered neuronal-glial interactions across M1 in chronic LBP.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)

A group of European experts was commissioned to establish guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) from evidence published up until March 2014, regarding pain, movement disorders, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, tinnitus, depression, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, craving/addiction, and conversion. Despite unavoidable inhomogeneities, there is a sufficient body of evidence to accept with level A (definite efficacy) the analgesic effect of high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the pain and the antidepressant effect of HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). A Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for the antidepressant effect of low-frequency (LF) rTMS of the right DLPFC, HF-rTMS of the left DLPFC for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, and LF-rTMS of contralesional M1 in chronic motor stroke. The effects of rTMS in a number of indications reach level C (possible efficacy), including LF-rTMS of the left temporoparietal cortex in tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. It remains to determine how to optimize rTMS protocols and techniques to give them relevance in routine clinical practice. In addition, professionals carrying out rTMS protocols should undergo rigorous training to ensure the quality of the technical realization, guarantee the proper care of patients, and maximize the chances of success. Under these conditions, the therapeutic use of rTMS should be able to develop in the coming years.

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in 2010, Issue 9. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques aim to induce an electrical stimulation of the brain in an attempt to reduce chronic pain by directly altering brain activity. They include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and reduced impedance non-invasive cortical electrostimulation (RINCE).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques in chronic pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2013, Issue 6), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS and clinical trials registers. The original search for the review was run in November 2009 and searched all databases from their inception. To identify studies for inclusion in this update we searched from 2009 to July 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised studies of rTMS, CES, tDCS or RINCE if they employed a sham stimulation control group, recruited patients over the age of 18 with pain of three months duration or more and measured pain as a primary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted and verified data. Where possible we entered data into meta-analyses. We excluded studies judged as being at high risk of bias from the analysis. We used the GRADE system to summarise the quality of evidence for core comparisons.

MAIN RESULTS

We included an additional 23 trials (involving 773 participants randomised) in this update, making a total of 56 trials in the review (involving 1710 participants randomised). This update included a total of 30 rTMS studies, 11 CES, 14 tDCS and one study of RINCE(the original review included 19 rTMS, eight CES and six tDCS studies). We judged only three studies as being at low risk of bias across all criteria.Meta-analysis of studies of rTMS (involving 528 participants) demonstrated significant heterogeneity. Pre-specified subgroup analyses suggest that low-frequency stimulation is ineffective (low-quality evidence) and that rTMS applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is ineffective (very low-quality evidence). We found a short-term effect on pain of active high-frequency stimulation of the motor cortex in single-dose studies (low-quality evidence, standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.39 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.27 to -0.51 P < 0.01)). This equates to a 12% (95% CI 8% to 15%) reduction in pain, which does not exceed the pre-established criteria for a minimal clinically important difference (≥ 15%). Evidence for multiple-dose studies was heterogenous but did not demonstrate a significant effect (very low-quality evidence).For CES (six studies, 270 participants) no statistically significant difference was found between active stimulation and sham (low-quality evidence).Analysis of tDCS studies (11 studies, 193 people) demonstrated significant heterogeneity and did not find a significant difference between active and sham stimulation (very low-quality evidence). Pre-specified subgroup analysis of tDCS applied to the motor cortex (n = 183) did not demonstrate a statistically significant effect and this lack of effect was consistent for subgroups of single or multiple-dose studies.One small study (n = 91) at unclear risk of bias suggested a positive effect of RINCE over sham stimulation on pain (very low-quality evidence).Non-invasive brain stimulation appears to be frequently associated with minor and transient side effects, though there were two reported incidences of seizure related to active rTMS in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single doses of high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex may have small short-term effects on chronic pain. It is likely that multiple sources of bias may exaggerate this observed effect. The effects do not meet the predetermined threshold of minimal clinical significance and multiple-dose studies do not consistently demonstrate effectiveness. The available evidence suggests that low-frequency rTMS, rTMS applied to the pre-frontal cortex, CES and tDCS are not effective in the treatment of chronic pain. While the broad conclusions for rTMS and CES have not changed substantially, the addition of this new evidence and the application of the GRADE system has modified some of our interpretation and the conclusion regarding the effectiveness of tDCS has changed. We recommend that previous readers should re-read this update. There is a need for larger, rigorously designed studies, particularly of longer courses of stimulation. It is likely that future evidence may substantially impact upon the presented results.

Complex regional pain syndrome: From diagnosis to rehabilitation

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a debilitating pathology characterised by intense chronic pain associated with vasomotor, sensory and motor dysfunction of the affected limb. Although the pathophysiology of CRPS is not fully understood, it is recognised that inflammatory processes and autonomic dysfunction are involved. These processes are associated with peripheral and central sensitisation as well as changes in brain structure and function, and are reflected in the clinical presentation of CRPS. CRPS management requires an interdisciplinary team and requires the therapeutic approach to be individualised. With regard to pharmacological treatment, bisphosphonates, corticosteroids, ketamine and anticonvulsants have been demonstrated to be effective for CRPS management. Psychotherapy, including cognitive-behavioural therapy, has produced promising results but more studies are needed to confirm its efficacy. Among rehabilitation interventions, there is evidence of the efficacy of physiotherapy and occupational therapy in diminishing CRPS symptoms and achieving a higher level of functioning. In this regard, the rehabilitation modality that seems the most promising according to the actual literature is graded motor imagery, which can help to reverse the maladaptive neuroplasticity occurring in CRPS.

Pressure pain thresholds increase after preconditioning 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with transcranial direct current stimulation

BACKGROUND

The primary motor cortex (M1) is an effective target of non-invasive cortical stimulation (NICS) for pain threshold modulation. It has been suggested that the initial level of cortical excitability of M1 plays a key role in the plastic effects of NICS.

OBJECTIVE

Here we investigate whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) primed 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) modulates experimental pressure pain thresholds and if this is related to observed alterations in cortical excitability.

METHOD

15 healthy, male participants received 10 min 1 mA anodal, cathodal and sham tDCS to the left M1 before 15 min 1 Hz rTMS in separate sessions over a period of 3 weeks. Motor cortical excitability was recorded at baseline, post-tDCS priming and post-rTMS through recording motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from right FDI muscle. Pressure pain thresholds were determined by quantitative sensory testing (QST) through a computerized algometer, on the palmar thenar of the right hand pre- and post-stimulation.

RESULTS

Cathodal tDCS-primed 1 Hz-rTMS was found to reverse the expected suppressive effect of 1 Hz rTMS on cortical excitability; leading to an overall increase in activity (p<0.001) with a parallel increase in pressure pain thresholds (p<0.01). In contrast, anodal tDCS-primed 1 Hz-rTMS resulted in a corresponding decrease in cortical excitability (p<0.05), with no significant effect on pressure pain.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that priming the M1 before stimulation of 1 Hz-rTMS modulates experimental pressure pain thresholds in a safe and controlled manner, producing a form of analgesia.

Therapeutic time window of noninvasive brain stimulation for pain treatment: inhibition of maladaptive plasticity with early intervention

Neuromodulatory effects of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) have been extensively studied in chronic disorders such as major depression, chronic pain and stroke. However, few studies have explored the use of these techniques in acute conditions. A possible use of NIBS in acute disorders is to prevent or reverse ongoing maladaptive plastic alterations, seemingly responsible for treatment refractoriness and detrimental behavioral changes. In this review, the authors discuss the potential role of NIBS in blocking maladaptive plasticity using the transition of acute to chronic pain in conditions such as postsurgical pain, central poststroke pain, pain after spinal cord injury and pain after traumatic brain injury as a model. The authors also present suggestions for clinical trial design using NIBS in the acute stage of illnesses.

Direct electrical stimulation of the somatosensory cortex in humans using electrocorticography electrodes: a qualitative and quantitative report

OBJECTIVE

Recently, electrocorticography-based brain-computer interfaces have been successfully used to translate cortical activity into control signals for external devices. However, the utility of such devices would be greatly enhanced by somatosensory feedback. Direct stimulation of somatosensory cortex evokes sensory perceptions, and is thus a promising option for closing the loop. Before this can be implemented in humans it is necessary to evaluate how changes in stimulus parameters are perceived and the extent to which they can be discriminated.

APPROACH

Electrical stimulation was delivered to the somatosensory cortex of human subjects implanted with electrocorticography grids. Subjects were asked to discriminate between stimuli of different frequency and amplitude as well as to report the qualitative sensations elicited by the stimulation.

MAIN RESULTS

In this study we show that in humans implanted with electrocorticography grids, variations in the amplitude or frequency of cortical electrical stimulation produce graded variations in percepts. Subjects were able to reliably distinguish between different stimuli.

SIGNIFICANCE

These results indicate that direct cortical stimulation is a feasible option for sensory feedback with brain-computer interface devices.

Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

There is currently no strong consensus regarding the optimal management of complex regional pain syndrome although a multitude of interventions have been described and are commonly used.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of the effectiveness of any therapeutic intervention used to reduce pain, disability or both in adults with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).

METHODS

We identified Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews through a systematic search of the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS and PEDro. We included non-Cochrane systematic reviews where they contained evidence not covered by identified Cochrane reviews. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool.We extracted data for the primary outcomes pain, disability and adverse events, and the secondary outcomes of quality of life, emotional well being and participants' ratings of satisfaction or improvement. Only evidence arising from randomised controlled trials was considered. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six Cochrane reviews and 13 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane reviews demonstrated better methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. Trials were typically small and the quality variable.There is moderate quality evidence that intravenous regional blockade with guanethidine is not effective in CRPS and that the procedure appears to be associated with the risk of significant adverse events.There is low quality evidence that bisphosphonates, calcitonin or a daily course of intravenous ketamine may be effective for pain when compared with placebo; graded motor imagery may be effective for pain and function when compared with usual care; and that mirror therapy may be effective for pain in post-stroke CRPS compared with a 'covered mirror' control. This evidence should be interpreted with caution. There is low quality evidence that local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade is not effective. Low quality evidence suggests that physiotherapy or occupational therapy are associated with small positive effects that are unlikely to be clinically important at one year follow up when compared with a social work passive attention control.For a wide range of other interventions, there is either no evidence or very low quality evidence available from which no conclusions should be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical lack of high quality evidence for the effectiveness of most therapies for CRPS. Until further larger trials are undertaken, formulating an evidence-based approach to managing CRPS will remain difficult.

Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

There is currently no strong consensus regarding the optimal management of complex regional pain syndrome although a multitude of interventions have been described and are commonly used.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of the effectiveness of any therapeutic intervention used to reduce pain, disability or both in adults with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).

METHODS

We identified Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews through a systematic search of the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS and PEDro. We included non-Cochrane systematic reviews where they contained evidence not covered by identified Cochrane reviews. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool.We extracted data for the primary outcomes pain, disability and adverse events, and the secondary outcomes of quality of life, emotional well being and participants' ratings of satisfaction or improvement. Only evidence arising from randomised controlled trials was considered. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six Cochrane reviews and 13 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane reviews demonstrated better methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. Trials were typically small and the quality variable.There is moderate quality evidence that intravenous regional blockade with guanethidine is not effective in CRPS and that the procedure appears to be associated with the risk of significant adverse events.There is low quality evidence that bisphosphonates, calcitonin or a daily course of intravenous ketamine may be effective for pain when compared with placebo; graded motor imagery may be effective for pain and function when compared with usual care; and that mirror therapy may be effective for pain in post-stroke CRPS compared with a 'covered mirror' control. This evidence should be interpreted with caution. There is low quality evidence that local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade is not effective. Low quality evidence suggests that physiotherapy or occupational therapy are associated with small positive effects that are unlikely to be clinically important at one year follow up when compared with a social work passive attention control.For a wide range of other interventions, there is either no evidence or very low quality evidence available from which no conclusions should be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical lack of high quality evidence for the effectiveness of most therapies for CRPS. Until further larger trials are undertaken, formulating an evidence-based approach to managing CRPS will remain difficult.

H-coil repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for pain relief in patients with diabetic neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Painful neuropathy is associated with plasticity changes in the nervous system. Standard repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a non-invasive technique used to study changes in cortical excitability and to inhibit pain perception. Deep rTMS is a newer development that allows direct activation of deeper neuronal populations, by a unique coil design termed the H-coil. This study was designed to assess whether deep rTMS applied over the motor cortical lower-limb representation relieves pain in patients with diabetic neuropathy.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive daily real or sham H-coil rTMS for 5 consecutive days. After a 5-week washout period, they crossed over to the alternative treatment for additional 5 days (according to a crossover study design). Outcome measures were changes in the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and in area and threshold of RIII nociceptive flexion reflex (RIII reflex).

RESULTS

Of the 25 patients randomized, 23 completed the study. After real rTMS, the VAS scores decreased significantly (p=0.01), and so did RIII reflex area (p<0.01), while no significant effects in these variables were induced by the sham rTMS treatment. The rTMS-induced changes in the outcome measures disappeared about 3 weeks after stimulation. All patients tolerated stimulation well.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep H-coil rTMS provides pain relief in patients with diabetic neuropathy. This innovative technique can induce a therapeutic effect on brain areas that otherwise remain difficult to target. rTMS may produce its analgesic effects, inducing motor cortex plasticity and activating descending inhibitory pain control systems.

Attenuation of spinal cord injury-induced astroglial and microglial activation by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in rats

Spinal cord injury (SCI) causes not only loss of sensory and motor function below the level of injury but also chronic pain, which is difficult and challenging of the treatment. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to the motor cortex, of non-invasive therapeutic methods, has the motor and sensory consequences and modulates pain in SCI-patients. In the present study, we studied the effectiveness of rTMS and the relationship between the modulation of pain and the changes of neuroglial expression in the spinal cord using a rat SCI-induced pain model. Elevated expressions of Iba1 and GFAP, specific microglial and astrocyte markers, was respectively observed in dorsal and ventral horns at the L4 and L5 levels in SCI rats. But in SCI rats treated with 25 Hz rTMS for 8 weeks, these expressions were significantly reduced by about 30%. Our finding suggests that this attenuation of activation by rTMS is related to pain modulation after SCI. Therefore, rTMS might provide an alternative means of attenuating neuropathic pain below the level of SCI.

Non-invasive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) of the Motor Cortex for Neuropathic Pain-At the Tipping Point?

The term "neuropathic pain" (NP) refers to chronic pain caused by illnesses or injuries that damage peripheral or central pain-sensing neural pathways to cause them to fire inappropriately and signal pain without cause. Neuropathic pain is common, complicating diabetes, shingles, HIV, and cancer. Medications are often ineffective or cause various adverse effects, so better approaches are needed. Half a century ago, electrical stimulation of specific brain regions (neuromodulation) was demonstrated to relieve refractory NP without distant effects, but the need for surgical electrode implantation limited use of deep brain stimulation. Next, electrodes applied to the dura outside the brain's surface to stimulate the motor cortex were shown to relieve NP less invasively. Now, electromagnetic induction permits cortical neurons to be stimulated entirely non-invasively using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Repeated sessions of many TMS pulses (rTMS) can trigger neuronal plasticity to produce long-lasting therapeutic benefit. Repeated TMS already has US and European regulatory approval for treating refractory depression, and multiple small studies report efficacy for neuropathic pain. Recent improvements include "frameless stereotactic" neuronavigation systems, in which patients' head MRIs allow TMS to be applied to precise underlying cortical targets, minimizing variability between sessions and patients, which may enhance efficacy. Transcranial magnetic stimulation appears poised for the larger trials necessary for regulatory approval of a NP indication. Since few clinicians are familiar with TMS, we review its theoretical basis and historical development, summarize the neuropathic pain trial results, and identify issues to resolve before large-scale clinical trials.

Motor cortex stimulation for facial chronic neuropathic pain: A review of the literature

Background:

Facial chronic neuropathic pain (FCNP) is a disabling clinical entity, its incidence is increasing within the chronic pain population. There is indication for neuromodulation when conservative treatment fails. Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) has emerged as an alternative in the advanced management of these patients. The aim of this work is to review the worldwide literature on MCS for FCNP.

Methods:

A PubMed search from 1990 to 2012 was conducted using established MeSH words. A total of 126 relevant articles on MCS focused on chronic pain were selected and analysed. Series of cases were divided in (1) series focused on MCS for FCNP, and (2) MCS series of FCNP mixed with other chronic pain entities.

Results:

A total of 118 patients have been trialed for MCS for FCNP, 100 (84.7%) pursued permanent implantation of the system, and 84% of them had good pain control at the end of the study. Male: female ratio was about 1:2 in the whole group of studies; mean age was 58 years (range, 28–83), and mean pain duration was 7 years (range, 0.6–25). Four randomized controlled studies have been reported, all of them not focused on MCS for FCNP. The most common complication was seizure followed by wound infection. Preoperative evaluation, surgical techniques, and final settings varied among the series.

Conclusion:

MCS for FNCP is a safe and efficacious treatment option when previous managements have failed; however, there is still lack of strong evidence (larger randomized controlled multicentre studies) that MCS can be offered in a regular basis to FNCP patients.

Treatment of complex regional pain syndrome in adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials published from June 2000 to February 2012

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a disabling pain condition with sensory, motor and autonomic manifestations. Uncertainty remains about how CRPS can be effectively managed. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for treatment and prophylactic interventions for CRPS published during the period 2000-2012, building on previous work by another group reviewing the period 1966-2000. Bibliographic database searches identified 173 papers which were filtered by three reviewers. This process generated 29 trials suitable for further analysis, each of which was reviewed and scored by two independent reviewers for methodological quality using a 15-item checklist. A number of novel and potentially effective treatments were investigated. Analysing the results from both review periods in combination, there was a steep rise in the number of published RCTs per review decade. There is evidence for the efficacy of 10 treatments (3× strong--bisphosphonates, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and graded motor imagery, 1× moderate and 6× limited evidence), and against the efficacy of 15 treatments (1× strong, 1× moderate and ×13 limited). The heterogeneity of trialled interventions and the pilot nature of many trials militate against drawing clear conclusions about the clinical usefulness of most interventions. This and the observed phenomenon of excellent responses in CRPS subgroups would support the case for a network- and multi-centre approach in the conduct of future clinical trials. Most published trials in CRPS are small with a short follow-up period, although several novel interventions investigated from 2000 to 2012 appear promising.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in neurology: what we have learned from randomized controlled studies

Background.  Initially developed to excite peripheral nerves, magnetic stimulation was quickly recognized as a valuable tool to noninvasively activate the cerebral cortex. The subsequent discovery that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) could have long-lasting effects on cortical excitability spawned a broad interest in the use of this technique as a new therapeutic method in a variety of neuropsychiatric disorders. Although the current outcomes from initial trials include some conflicting results, initial evidence supports that rTMS might have a therapeutic value in different neurologic conditions. Methods.  We reviewed the results of clinical trials of rTMS on four different disorders: stroke, Parkinson's disease, chronic refractory pain, and epilepsy. We reviewed randomized, controlled studies only in order to obtain the strongest evidence for the clinical effects of rTMS. Results.  An extensive literature review revealed 32 articles that met our criteria. From these studies, we found evidence for the therapeutic efficacy of rTMS, particularly in the relief of chronic pain and motor neurorehabilitation in single hemisphere stroke patients. Repetitive TMS also seems to have a therapeutic effect on motor function in Parkinson's disease, but the evidence is somewhat confounded by the uncontrolled variability of multiple factors. Lastly, only two randomized, sham-controlled studies have been performed for epilepsy; although evidence indicates rTMS may reduce seizure frequency in patients with neocortical foci, more research is needed to confirm these initial findings. Conclusions.  There is mounting evidence for the efficacy of rTMS in the short-term treatment of certain neurologic conditions. More long-term research is needed in order to properly evaluate the effects of this method in a clinical setting.

Analgesic effects of noninvasive brain stimulation in rodent animal models: a systematic review of translational findings

OBJECTIVES

Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) interventions have demonstrated promising results in the clinical treatment of pain, according to several preliminary trials, although the results have been mixed. The limitations of clinical research on NIBS are the insufficient understanding of its mechanisms of action, a lack of adequate safety data, and several disparities with regard to stimulation parameters, which have hindered the generalizability of such studies. Thus, experimental animal research that allows the use of more invasive interventions and creates additional control of independent variables and confounders is desirable. To this end, we systematically reviewed animal studies investigating the analgesic effects of NIBS. In addition, we also explored the investigation of NIBS in animal models of stroke as to compare these findings with NIBS animal pain research.

METHODS

Of 1916 articles that were found initially, we identified 15 studies (stroke and pain studies) per our eligibility criteria that used NIBS methods, such as transcranial direct current stimulation, paired associative stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcranial electrostimulation. We extracted the main outcomes on stroke and pain, as well as the methods and electrical parameters of each technique.

RESULTS

NIBS techniques are effective in alleviating pain. Similar beneficial clinical effects are observed in stroke. The main insights from these animal studies are the following: 1) combination of NIBS with analgesic drugs has a synergistic effect; 2) effects are dependent on the parameters of stimulation, and in fact, not necessarily the strongest stimulation parameter (i.e., the largest intensity of stimulation) is associated with the largest benefit; 3) pain studies show an overall good quality as indexed by Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments guidelines of the reporting of animal experiments, but insufficient with regard to the reporting of safety data for brain stimulation; 4) these studies suggest that NIBS techniques have a primary effect on synaptic plasticity, but they also suggest other mechanisms of action such as via neurovascular modulation.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a limited number of animal studies for both pain and stroke NIBS experimental research. There is a lack of safety data in animal studies in these two topics and results from these studies have not been yet fully tested and translated to human research. We discuss the challenges and limitations of translating experimental animal research on NIBS into clinical studies.

Measuring GABAergic inhibitory activity with TMS-EEG and its potential clinical application for chronic pain

Chronic pain is debilitating disorder in which the underlying pathophysiology is still unknown. Impaired cortical inhibition is one mechanism that is associated with chronic pain. Cortical inhibition refers to a neurophysiological process in which gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) inhibitory interneurons selectively attenuate the activity of pyramidal neurons in the cortex. Previous studies have capitalized on the ability of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to index cortical inhibition by stimulating the motor cortex and measuring the resulting peripheral motor evoked potentials with electromyography. Chronic pain has been shown to induce changes in cortical inhibition within the motor cortex using TMS. Electroencephalography (EEG) studies also demonstrate that gamma (30-50 Hz) oscillations in the prefrontal and somatosensory cortex are associated with the experience of pain. As gamma oscillations are mediated by GABA, the combination of TMS with EEG allows for the examination of the relationship between cortical inhibition, gamma and chronic pain. In this paper, we summarize the evidence of impaired GABAergic and gamma oscillations in chronic pain patients. We then demonstrate TMS-EEG as a reliable method in which to record cortical inhibition directly from the prefrontal cortex to examine the modulatory effect of GABAB receptor inhibition on cortical oscillations. Finally, the modulation of GABA and gamma oscillations with repetitive TMS will be suggested as the possible mechanism through which rTMS exerts its therapeutic effects in the treatment of pain. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to present the TMS-EEG as a potential method through which to better classify, diagnose and treat chronic pain.

Brain stimulation in the treatment of chronic neuropathic and non-cancerous pain

Chronic neuropathic pain is one of the most prevalent and debilitating disorders. Conventional medical management, however, remains frustrating for both patients and clinicians owing to poor specificity of pharmacotherapy, delayed onset of analgesia and extensive side effects. Neuromodulation presents as a promising alternative, or at least an adjunct, as it is more specific in inducing analgesia without associated risks of pharmacotherapy. Here, we discuss common clinical and investigational methods of neuromodulation. Compared to clinical spinal cord stimulation (SCS), investigational techniques of cerebral neuromodulation, both invasive (deep brain stimulation [DBS] and motor cortical stimulation [MCS]) and noninvasive (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [rTMS] and transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]), may be more advantageous. By adaptively targeting the multidimensional experience of pain, subtended by integrative pain circuitry in the brain, including somatosensory and thalamocortical, limbic and cognitive, cerebral methods may modulate the sensory-discriminative, affective-emotional and evaluative-cognitive spheres of the pain neuromatrix. Despite promise, the current state of results alludes to the possibility that cerebral neuromodulation has thus far not been effective in producing analgesia as intended in patients with chronic pain disorders. These techniques, thus, remain investigational and off-label. We discuss issues implicated in inadequate efficacy, variability of responsiveness, and poor retention of benefit, while recommending design and conceptual refinements for future trials of cerebral neuromodulation in management of chronic neuropathic pain.

PERSPECTIVE

This critical review focuses on factors contributing to poor therapeutic utility of invasive and noninvasive brain stimulation in the treatment of chronic neuropathic and pain of noncancerous origin. Through key clinical trial design and conceptual refinements, retention and consistency of response may be improved, potentially facilitating the widespread clinical applicability of such approaches.

Fibromyalgia: From treatment to rehabilitation

Fibromyalgia is a clinical syndrome of chronic widespread pain and reduced pain thresholds to palpation. The pathophysiology remains unknown, but there is increasing evidence that peripheral and central sensitization cause an amplification of sensory impulses that may alter pain perception in fibromyalgia patients. Interventions to treat fibromyalgia should aim at different targets simultaneously in order to reduce peripheral and central sensitization. There are both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches with evidence for effectiveness in the treatment of fibromyalgia and its associated symptoms. Evidence from randomized trials and meta-analyses shows that partial and short-term improvements in fibromyalgia symptoms can be achieved with low doses of antidepressants and with physical activity such as aerobic and strengthening exercises. A multidimensional approach which emphasizes education and integration of exercise and cognitive behavior therapy improves quality of life and reduces pain, fatigue and depressive symptoms when measured on a short term basis. More recently, trials have shown the neuromodulators gabapentin and pregabalin to be effective in reducing pain and improving quality of sleep in fibromyalgia. In addition, small trials of noninvasive brain stimulation have also shown benefits in reducing pain in fibromyalgia. It is essential to keep in mind that some important clinical conditions can mimic and overlap with fibromyalgia and should always be ruled out by a complete history, physical examination and appropriate laboratory testing.

[French guidelines on the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): safety and therapeutic indications]

During the past decade, a large amount of work on transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been performed, including the development of new paradigms of stimulation, the integration of imaging data, and the coupling of TMS techniques with electroencephalography or neuroimaging. These accumulating data being difficult to synthesize, several French scientific societies commissioned a group of experts to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on TMS. This text contains all the consensual findings of the expert group on the mechanisms of action, safety rules and indications of TMS, including repetitive TMS (rTMS). TMS sessions have been conducted in thousands of healthy subjects or patients with various neurological or psychiatric diseases, allowing a better assessment of risks associated with this technique. The number of reported side effects is extremely low, the most serious complication being the occurrence of seizures. In most reported seizures, the stimulation parameters did not follow the previously published recommendations (Wassermann, 1998) [430] and rTMS was associated to medication that could lower the seizure threshold. Recommendations on the safe use of TMS / rTMS were recently updated (Rossi et al., 2009) [348], establishing new limits for stimulation parameters and fixing the contraindications. The recommendations we propose regarding safety are largely based on this previous report with some modifications. By contrast, the issue of therapeutic indications of rTMS has never been addressed before, the present work being the first attempt of a synthesis and expert consensus on this topic. The use of TMS/rTMS is discussed in the context of chronic pain, movement disorders, stroke, epilepsy, tinnitus and psychiatric disorders. There is already a sufficient level of evidence of published data to retain a therapeutic indication of rTMS in clinical practice (grade A) in chronic neuropathic pain, major depressive episodes, and auditory hallucinations. The number of therapeutic indications of rTMS is expected to increase in coming years, in parallel with the optimisation of stimulation parameters.

A randomized, controlled investigation of motor cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) effects on quantitative sensory measures in healthy adults: evaluation of TMS device parameters

OBJECTIVES

There is emerging evidence that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can produce analgesic effects in clinical samples and in healthy adults undergoing experimentally induced pain; and the field of minimally invasive brain stimulation for the management of pain is expanding rapidly. Although motor cortex is the most widely used cortical target for TMS in the management of neuropathic pain, few studies have systematically investigated the analgesic effects of a full range of device parameters to provide initial hints about what stimulation intensities and frequencies are most helpful (or even potentially harmful) to patients. Further, there is considerable inconsistency between studies with respect to laboratory pain measurement procedures, TMS treatment parameters, sophistication of the sham methods, and sample sizes.

METHODS

This study used a sham-controlled, within-subject, cross-over design to examine the effects of 5 different TMS treatment parameters across several quantitative sensory measures in a sample of healthy adult volunteers. Sixty-five participants underwent quantitative sensory testing procedures pre and post-40-minutes of real and sham motor cortex TMS. TMS was delivered at 1 Hz 80% resting motor threshold (rMT), 1 Hz 100% rMT, 10 Hz 80% rMT, 10 Hz 100% rMT, or 50 Hz triplets at 90% of active motor threshold (intermittent theta-burst).

RESULTS

The mean painfulness rating of real TMS stimulation itself was 3.0 (SE=0.36) out of 10 and was significantly greater than zero [t(64)=8.17, P<0.0001]. The sham TMS methods used permitted matching between real and sham TMS-induced scalp sensations and participants were successfully blinded to condition (real versus sham). Findings suggest that the effects of motor cortex TMS on quantitative sensory tests in healthy adults vary across different treatment parameters with the smallest observed effect for intermittent theta-burst stimulation (Cohen's d=0.03) and the largest for 10 Hz 100% rMT (d=0.34).

DISCUSSION

Overall, TMS was associated with statistically significant effects on warm and cool sensory thresholds, cold pain thresholds, suprathreshold stimulus unpleasantness ratings, and wind-up pain. With respect to device parameter effects, higher frequency stimulation seems to be associated with the most analgesic and antisensitivity effects with the exception of intermittent theta-burst stimulation. The present findings support several clinical research findings suggesting that higher TMS frequencies tend to be associated with the most clinical benefit in patients with chronic pain.

Safety and tolerability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with pathologic positive sensory phenomena: a review of literature

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is emerging as a valuable therapeutic and diagnostic tool. rTMS appears particularly promising for disorders characterized by positive sensory phenomena that are attributable to alterations in sensory cortical excitability. Among these are tinnitus, auditory and visual hallucinations, and pain syndromes.

OBJECTIVE

Despite studies addressing rTMS efficacy in suppression of positive sensory symptoms, the safety of stimulation of potentially hyperexcitable cortex has not been fully addressed. We performed a systematic literature review and metaanalysis to describe the rTMS safety profile in these disorders.

METHODS

Using the PubMed database, we performed an English-language literature search from January 1985 to April 2011 to review all pertinent publications. Per study, we noted and listed pertinent details. From these data we also calculated a crude per-subject risk for each adverse event.

RESULTS

One hundred six publications (n = 1815) were identified with patients undergoing rTMS for pathologic positive sensory phenomena. Adverse events associated with rTMS were generally mild and occurred in 16.7% of subjects. Seizure was the most serious adverse event, and occurred in three patients with a 0.16% crude per-subject risk. The second most severe adverse event involved aggravation of sensory phenomena, occurring in 1.54%.

CONCLUSIONS

The published data suggest rTMS for the treatment or diagnosis of pathologic positive sensory phenomena appears to be a relatively safe and well-tolerated procedure. However, published data are lacking in systematic reporting of adverse events, and safety risks of rTMS in these patient populations will have to be addressed in future prospective trials.

Phantom limb pain: low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in unaffected hemisphere

Phantom limb pain is very common after limb amputation and is often difficult to treat. The motor cortex stimulation is a valid treatment for deafferentation pain that does not respond to conventional pain treatment, with relief for 50% to 70% of patients. This treatment is invasive as it uses implanted epidural electrodes. Cortical stimulation can be performed noninvasively by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). The stimulation of the hemisphere that isn't involved in phantom limb (unaffected hemisphere), remains unexplored. We report a case of phantom limb pain treated with 1 Hz rTMS stimulation over motor cortex in unaffected hemisphere. This stimulation produces a relevant clinical improvement of phantom limb pain; however, further studies are necessary to determine the efficacy of the method and the stimulation parameters.

Pain relief and functional recovery in patients with complex regional pain syndrome after motor cortex stimulation

In addition to pain and neurovegetative symptoms, patients with severe forms of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) develop a broad range of symptoms, including sensory disturbances, motor impairment and dystonic posturing. While most patients respond to medical therapy, some are considered refractory and become surgical candidates. To date, the most commonly used surgical procedure for CRPS has been spinal cord stimulation. This therapy often leads to important analgesic effects, but no sensory or motor improvements. We report on 2 patients with pain related to CRPS and severe functional deficits treated with motor cortex stimulation (MCS) who not only had significant analgesic effects, but also improvements in sensory and motor symptoms. In the long term (27 and 36 months after surgery), visual analog scale pain scores were improved by 60-70% as compared to baseline. There was also a significant increase in the range of motion in the joints of the affected limbs and an improvement in allodynia, hyperpathia and hypoesthesia. Positron emission tomography scan in both subjects revealed that MCS influenced regions involved in the circuitry of pain.

Long-term maintenance of the analgesic effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation in fibromyalgia

We assessed for the first time the long-term maintenance of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)-induced analgesia in patients with chronic widespread pain due to fibromyalgia. Forty consecutive patients were randomly assigned, in a double-blind fashion, to 2 groups: one receiving active rTMS (n=20) and the other, sham stimulation (n=20), applied to the left primary motor cortex. The stimulation protocol consisted of 14 sessions: an "induction phase" of 5 daily sessions followed by a "maintenance phase" of 3 sessions a week apart, 3 sessions a fortnight apart, and 3 sessions a month apart. The primary outcome was average pain intensity over the last 24 hours, measured before each stimulation from day 1 to week 21 and at week 25 (1 month after the last stimulation). Other outcomes measured included quality of life, mood and anxiety, and several parameters of motor cortical excitability. Thirty patients completed the study (14 in the sham stimulation group and 16 in the active stimulation group). Active rTMS significantly reduced pain intensity from day 5 to week 25. These analgesic effects were associated with a long-term improvement in items related to quality of life (including fatigue, morning tiredness, general activity, walking, and sleep) and were directly correlated with changes in intracortical inhibition. In conclusion, these results suggest that TMS may be a valuable and safe new therapeutic option in patients with fibromyalgia.

rTMS over the cerebellum modulates temperature detection and pain thresholds through peripheral mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of motor and prefrontal cortex has been shown to modulate pain perception. Even though evidence suggests an involvement of cerebellar structures in pain processing, the effect of rTMS over the cerebellum on pain perception has not yet been investigated.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

This study aimed to test the effects of rTMS over the cerebellum on sensory perception, particularly controlling for peripheral stimulation effects.

METHODS

Sensory perception was determined as temperature detection and temperature pain thresholds. Experiment one explored the effects of four different rTMS protocols (flat figure-of-eight coil; 120% motor resting threshold; 1000 stimuli; 1 Hz and 10 Hz; medial and right lateral cerebellum) on sensory thresholds in 10 healthy volunteers using pairwise comparisons. The most efficient protocol of experiment one was compared in a second experiment with two control conditions (rTMS with a sham coil over the cerebellum [sham] and repetitive magnetic stimulation [rMS] of the neck) by using robust statistics (MANOVA).

RESULTS

The first experiment demonstrated pronounced effects on sensory perception for 1Hz rTMS over the lateral cerebellum. The second experiment confirmed this result in comparison to sham. However, rMS over the neck had a similar effect like rTMS over the cerebellum.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that changes in sensory perception after rTMS over the cerebellum are largely due to stimulation effects on peripheral structures and support recent reports of analgesic effects of neck rMS. They advocate the critical review of the proposed analgesic effects of rTMS and encourage the future use of proper control conditions in rTMS research.

Neuropharmacological basis of rTMS-induced analgesia: the role of endogenous opioids

We investigated the role of endogenous opioid systems in the analgesic effects induced by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). We compared the analgesic effects of motor cortex (M1) or dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) stimulation before and after naloxone or placebo treatment, in a randomized, double-blind crossover design, in healthy volunteers. Three groups of 12 volunteers were selected at random and given active stimulation (frequency 10Hz, at 80% motor threshold intensity, 1500 pulses per session) of the right M1, active stimulation of the right DLPFC, or sham stimulation, during two experimental sessions 2 weeks apart. Cold pain thresholds and the intensity of pain induced by a series of fixed-temperature cold stimuli (5, 10, and 15°C) were used to evaluate the analgesic effects of rTMS. Measurements were made at the left thenar eminence, before and 1 hour after the intravenous injection of naloxone (bolus of 0.1mg/kg followed by a continuous infusion of 0.1mg/kg/h until the end of rTMS) or placebo (saline). Naloxone injection significantly decreased the analgesic effects of M1 stimulation, but did not change the effects of rTMS of the DLPFC or sham rTMS. This study demonstrates, for the first time, the involvement of endogenous opioid systems in rTMS-induced analgesia. The differential effects of naloxone on M1 and DLPFC stimulation suggest that the analgesic effects induced by the stimulation of these 2 cortical sites are mediated by different mechanisms. Endogenous opioids are shown to be involved in the analgesic effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex.

Effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of primary motor cortex on laser-evoked potentials in migraine

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of high-frequency (HF) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the left primary motor cortex (M1) on subjective pain and evoked responses induced by laser stimulation (LEPs) of the contralateral hand and supraorbital zone in a cohort of migraine patients without aura during the inter-critical phase, and to compare the effects with those of non-migraine healthy controls. Thirteen migraine patients and 12 sex- and age-matched controls were evaluated. Each rTMS session consisted of 1,800 stimuli at a frequency of 5 Hz and 90% motor threshold intensity. Sham (control) rTMS was performed at the same stimulation position. The vertex LEP amplitude was reduced at the trigeminal and hand levels in the sham-placebo condition and after rTMS to a greater extent in the migraine patients than in healthy controls, while the laser pain rating was unaffected. These results suggest that HF rTMS of motor cortex and the sham procedure can both modulate pain-related evoked responses in migraine patients.

Development and evaluation of a portable sham transcranial magnetic stimulation system

BACKGROUND

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a relatively noninvasive brain stimulation technology that can focally stimulate the human cortex. One significant limitation of much of the TMS research to date concerns the nature of the placebo or sham conditions used. When TMS pulses are delivered repetitively (especially prefrontal TMS), it is often experienced as painful. Most sham TMS techniques produce identical sounds to active TMS, but they do not cause much, if any, scalp or facial sensation or discomfort. This is a serious problem when investigators are attempting to evaluate the effects of TMS by using traditional sham techniques because of unintended systematic differences between real and sham TMS groups (ie, confounds). As long as traditional approaches to sham TMS are used, the validity of the inferences regarding the efficacy of TMS will be limited. Although some other sophisticated systems have been developed to address these concerns, they tend to be expensive and lack portability. Portability will likely become more and more important as TMS applications expand into different clinical areas (eg, TMS in the postanesthesia care unit after surgery).

METHODS

This study describes a portable electrical TMS sham system (eSham system) modeled after the James Long System that was designed to produce similar scalp sensations as real TMS. Preliminary results are presented on 9 healthy adults who received both real and eSham 10 Hz repetitive TMS (rTMS) (at 80%, 100%, and 120% of resting motor threshold) over the prefrontal cortex and rated the sensation quality (pain, tingling, sharpness, piercing, electric, tugging, pinching), tolerability, and location.

RESULTS

Real TMS and eSham TMS were rated similarly across all seven sensory dimensions examined. Real and eSham TMS were also rated similarly with respect to tolerability and perceived location of the TMS-induced sensations.

CONCLUSIONS

The eSham system may be a simple, affordable, and portable approach to providing convincing sham TMS for future clinical trials. This study provides preliminary evidence supporting the use of the eSham system. Future larger-scale studies are warranted.

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques aim to induce an electrical stimulation of the brain in an attempt to reduce chronic pain by directly altering brain activity. They include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques in chronic pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, the Cochrane PaPaS Group Trials Register and clinical trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised studies of rTMS, CES or tDCS if they employed a sham stimulation control group, recruited patients over the age of 18 with pain of three months duration or more and measured pain as a primary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted and verified data. Where possible we entered data into meta-analyses. We excluded studies judged as being at high risk of bias from the analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 trials in the review (involving 937 people)(19 rTMS, eight CES and six tDCS). Only one study was judged as being at low risk of bias.Studies of rTMS (involving 368 participants ) demonstrated significant heterogeneity. Pre-specified subgroup analyses suggest that low-frequency stimulation is ineffective. A short-term effect on pain of active high-frequency stimulation of the motor cortex in single-dose studies was suggested (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.26 to -0.54, P < 0.00001). This equates to a 15% (95% CI 10% to 20%) reduction in pain which does not clearly exceed the pre-established criteria for a minimally clinically important difference (> 15%).For CES (four studies, 133 participants) no statistically significant difference was found between active stimulation and sham. Analysis of tDCS studies (five studies, 83 people) demonstrated significant heterogeneity and did not find a significant difference between active and sham stimulation. Pre-specified subgroup analysis of tDCS applied to the motor cortex suggested superiority of active stimulation over sham (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.08).Non-invasive brain stimulation appears to be associated with minor and transient side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single doses of high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex may have small short-term effects on chronic pain. The effects do not clearly exceed the predetermined threshold of minimal clinical significance. Low-frequency rTMS is not effective in the treatment of chronic pain. There is insufficient evidence from which to draw firm conclusions regarding the efficacy of CES or tDCS. The available evidence suggests that tDCS applied to the motor cortex may have short-term effects on chronic pain and that CES may be ineffective. There is a need for further, rigorously designed studies of all types of stimulation.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is efficacious as an add-on to pharmacological therapy in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type I

Single-session repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the motor cortex (M1) is effective in the treatment of chronic pain patients, but the analgesic effect of repeated sessions is still unknown. We evaluated the effects of rTMS in patients with refractory pain due to complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type I. Twenty-three patients presenting CRPS type I of 1 upper limb were treated with the best medical treatment (analgesics and adjuvant medications, physical therapy) plus 10 daily sessions of either real (r-) or sham (s-) 10 Hz rTMS to the motor cortex (M1). Patients were assessed daily and after 1 week and 3 months after the last session using the Visual Analogical Scale (VAS), the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), the Health Survey-36 (SF-36), and the Hamilton Depression (HDRS). During treatment there was a significant reduction in the VAS scores favoring the r-rTMS group, mean reduction of 4.65 cm (50.9%) against 2.18 cm (24.7%) in the s-rTMS group. The highest reduction occurred at the tenth session and correlated to improvement in the affective and emotional subscores of the MPQ and SF-36. Real rTMS to the M1 produced analgesic effects and positive changes in affective aspects of pain in CRPS patients during the period of stimulation.

PERSPECTIVE

This study shows an efficacy of repetitive sessions of high-frequency rTMS as an add-on therapy to refractory CRPS type I patients. It had a positive effect in different aspects of pain (sensory-discriminative and emotional-affective). It opens the perspective for the clinical use of this technique.

Treatment of complex regional pain syndrome: a review of the evidence

PURPOSE

This narrative review summarizes the evidence derived from randomized controlled trials pertaining to the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).

SOURCE

Using the MEDLINE (January 1950 to April 2009) and EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2009) databases, the following medical subject headings (MeSH) were searched: "Complex Regional Pain Syndrome", "Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy", and "causalgia" as well as the key words "algodystrophy", "Sudeck's atrophy", "shoulder hand syndrome", "neurodystrophy", "neuroalgodystrophy", "reflex neuromuscular dystrophy", and "posttraumatic dystrophy". Results were limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted on human subjects, written in English, published in peer-reviewed journals, and pertinent to treatment.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The search criteria yielded 41 RCTs with a mean of 31.7 subjects per study. Blinded assessment and sample size justification were provided in 70.7% and 19.5% of RCTs, respectively. Only biphosphonates appear to offer clear benefits for patients with CRPS. Improvement has been reported with dimethyl sulfoxide, steroids, epidural clonidine, intrathecal baclofen, spinal cord stimulation, and motor imagery programs, but further trials are required. The available evidence does not support the use of calcitonin, vasodilators, or sympatholytic and neuromodulative intravenous regional blockade. Clear benefits have not been reported with stellate/lumbar sympathetic blocks, mannitol, gabapentin, and physical/occupational therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Published RCTs can only provide limited evidence to formulate recommendations for treatment of CRPS. In this review, no study was excluded based on factors such as sample size justification, statistical power, blinding, definition of intervention allocation, or clinical outcomes. Thus, evidence derived from "weaker" trials may be overemphasized. Further well-designed RCTs are warranted.