Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) Safety Considerations and Recommendations

Opportunities and obstacles in non-invasive brain stimulation

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a complex and multifaceted approach to modulating brain activity and holds the potential for broad accessibility. This work discusses the mechanisms of the four distinct approaches to modulating brain activity non-invasively: electrical currents, magnetic fields, light, and ultrasound. We examine the dual stochastic and deterministic nature of brain activity and its implications for NIBS, highlighting the challenges posed by inter-individual variability, nebulous dose-response relationships, potential biases and neuroanatomical heterogeneity. Looking forward, we propose five areas of opportunity for future research: closed-loop stimulation, consistent stimulation of the intended target region, reducing bias, multimodal approaches, and strategies to address low sample sizes.

The assessment of interhemispheric imbalance using functional near-infrared spectroscopic and transcranial magnetic stimulation for predicting motor outcome after stroke

Objective

To investigate changes in interhemispheric imbalance of cortical excitability during motor recovery after stroke and to clarify the relationship between motor function recovery and alterations in interhemispheric imbalance, with the aim to establish more effective neuromodulation strategies.

Methods

Thirty-one patients underwent assessments of resting motor threshold (RMT) using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS); the cortical activity of the primary motor cortex (M1), premotor cortex (PMC), and supplementary motor area (SMA) using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS); as well as motor function using upper extremity Fugl-Meyer (FMA-UE). The laterality index (LI) of RMT and fNIRS were also calculated. All indicators were measured at baseline(T1) and 1 month later(T2). Correlations between motor function outcome and TMS and fNIRS metrics at baseline were analyzed using bivariate correlation.

Results

All the motor function (FMA-UE1, FMA-UE2, FMA-d2) and LI-RMT (LI-RMT1 and LI-RMT2) had a moderate negative correlation. The higher the corticospinal excitability of the affected hemisphere, the better the motor outcome of the upper extremity, especially in the distal upper extremity (r = -0.366, p = 0.043; r = -0.393, p = 0.029). The greater the activation of the SMA of the unaffected hemisphere, the better the motor outcome, especially in the distal upper extremity (r = -0.356, p = 0.049; r = -0.367, p = 0.042). There was a significant moderate positive correlation observed between LI-RMT2 and LI-SMA1 (r = 0.422, p = 0.018). The improvement in motor function was most significant when both LI-RMT1 and LI-SMA1 were lower. Besides, in patients dominated by unaffected hemisphere corticospinal excitability during motor recovery, LI-(M1 + SMA + PMC)2 exhibited a significant moderate positive association with the proximal upper extremity function 1 month later (r = 0.642, p = 0.007).

Conclusion

The combination of both TMS and fNIRS can infer the prognosis of motor function to some extent. Which can infer the role of both hemispheres in recovery and may contribute to the development of effective individualized neuromodulation strategies.

Effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on neurobiological changes in Alzheimer's disease (Review)

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive decline and brain neuronal loss. A pioneering field of research in AD is brain stimulation via electromagnetic fields (EMFs), which may produce clinical benefits. Noninvasive brain stimulation techniques, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), have been developed to treat neurological and psychiatric disorders. The purpose of the present review is to identify neurobiological changes, including inflammatory, neurodegenerative, apoptotic, neuroprotective and genetic changes, which are associated with repetitive TMS (rTMS) treatment in patients with AD. Furthermore, it aims to evaluate the effect of TMS treatment in patients with AD and to identify the associated mechanisms. The present review highlights the changes in inflammatory and apoptotic mechanisms, mitochondrial enzymatic activities, and modulation of gene expression (microRNA expression profiles) associated with rTMS or sham procedures. At the molecular level, it has been suggested that EMFs generated by TMS may affect the cell redox status and amyloidogenic processes. TMS may also modulate gene expression by acting on both transcriptional and post‑transcriptional regulatory mechanisms. TMS may increase brain cortical excitability, induce specific potentiation phenomena, and promote synaptic plasticity and recovery of impaired functions; thus, it may re‑establish cognitive performance in patients with AD.

Genetic Algorithm for TMS Coil Position Optimization in Stroke Treatment

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), a non-invasive technique to stimulate human brain, has been widely used in stroke treatment for its capability of regulating synaptic plasticity and promoting cortical functional reconstruction. As shown in previous studies, the high electric field (E-field) intensity around the lesion helps in the recovery of brain function, thus the spatial location and angle of coil truly matter for the significant correlation with therapeutic effect of TMS. But, the error caused by coil placement in current clinical setting is still non-negligible and a more precise coil positioning method needs to be proposed. In this study, two kinds of real brain stroke models of ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke were established by inserting relative lesions into three human head models. A coil position optimization algorithm, based on the genetic algorithm (GA), was developed to search the spatial location and rotation angle of the coil in four 4 × 4 cm search domains around the lesion. It maximized the average intensity of the E-field in the voxel of interest (VOI). In this way, maximum 17.48% higher E-field intensity than that of clinical TMS stimulation was obtained. Besides, our method also shows the potential to avoid unnecessary exposure to the non-target regions. The proposed algorithm was verified to provide an optimal position after nine iterations and displayed good robustness for coil location optimization between different stroke models. To conclude, the optimized spatial location and rotation angle of the coil for TMS stroke treatment could be obtained through our algorithm, reducing the intensity and duration of human electromagnetic exposure and presenting a significant therapeutic potential of TMS for stroke.

Novel TMS for Stroke and Depression (NoTSAD): Accelerated Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation as a Safe and Effective Treatment for Post-stroke Depression

Background: Post-stroke depression (PSD) affects up to 50% of stroke survivors, reducing quality of life, and increasing adverse outcomes. Conventional therapies to treat PSD may not be effective for some patients. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is well-established as an effective treatment for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and some small trials have shown that rTMS may be effective for chronic PSD; however, no trials have evaluated an accelerated rTMS protocol in a subacute stroke population. We hypothesized that an accelerated rTMS protocol will be a safe and viable option to treat PSD symptoms. Methods: Patients (N = 6) with radiographic evidence of ischemic stroke within the last 2 weeks to 6 months with Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) scores >7 were recruited for an open label study using an accelerated rTMS protocol as follows: High-frequency (20-Hz) rTMS at 110% resting motor threshold (RMT) was applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) during five sessions per day over four consecutive days for a total of 20 sessions. Safety assessment and adverse events were documented based on the patients' responses following each day of stimulation. Before and after the 4-days neurostimulation protocol, outcome measures were obtained for the HAMD, modified Rankin Scale (mRS), functional independence measures (FIM), and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scales (NIHSS). These same measures were obtained at 3-months follow up. Results: HAMD significantly decreased (Wilcoxon p = 0.03) from M = 15.5 (2.81)-4.17 (0.98) following rTMS, a difference which persisted at the 3-months follow-up (p = 0.03). No statistically significant difference in FIM, mRS, or NIHSS were observed. No significant adverse events related to the treatment were observed and patients tolerated the stimulation protocol well overall. Conclusions: This pilot study indicates that an accelerated rTMS protocol is a safe and viable option, and may be an effective alternative or adjunctive therapy for patients suffering from PSD. Future randomized, controlled studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04093843.

[Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the diagnostic and treatment of pain syndromes in children and adults]

The authors review the literature and own data concerning therapeutic use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in children and adult patients with pain syndromes of different origins. TMS may act as a tool to excite or inhibit neuroplasticity in the central nervous system, which depends of the therapeutic regime used. TMS induces neurogenesis and synaptogenesis, rhythmic TMS may cause long-lasting after-effects, including pain inhibitory effect. A decrease in the threshold and an increase in the amplitude of motor evoked potentials in TMS are the most frequent changes in pain syndromes in the diagnostic modality. The efficacy of different regimes in the treatment of pain syndromes remains understudied. Despite vast knowledge on clinical use of TMS in pain syndromes in adults, in pediatrics its use is limited to migraine treatment. TMS is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool that should be more often implemented in neurorehabilitation and treatment of neurological diseases in adults and children with pain syndromes.

Is the Organization of the Primary Motor Cortex in Low Back Pain Related to Pain, Movement, and/or Sensation?

AIM/BACKGROUND

Primary motor cortex (M1) organization differs between individuals with and without chronic low back pain (CLBP), in parallel with motor and sensory impairments. This study investigated whether movement behaviour and tactile/pain sensation are related to M1 organisation in CLBP.

METHODS

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to map the M1 representation of the erector spinae and multifidus muscles in 20 participants with and without CLBP. Cortical organisation was quantified by: map volume; center of gravity (CoG); number of peaks; and primary and secondary peak location. Movement behaviour was assessed as the ability to dissociate lumbar from thorax motion and sensory function as two-point discrimination, pressure pain thresholds, and pain intensity (visual analogue scale).

RESULTS

People with CLBP showed more anterior location of the CoG than controls. Map peaks were more numerous in CLBP participants who performed the movement task good than those with poor performance. In CLBP, smaller map volume correlated with greater pain during the movement task. Movement behaviour was not linearly correlated with M1 features.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that M1 maps differ between people with and without CLBP, but these changes are variable within the CLBP group and are not related to motor and sensory features in a simple manner.

Motor cortex representation of deep and superficial neck flexor muscles in individuals with and without neck pain

Sensorimotor control of neck muscles differs between individuals with and without pain. Differences in the primary motor cortex (M1) maps of these muscles may be involved. This study compared M1 representations of deep (DNF) and superficial (SNF) neck flexor muscles between 10 individuals with neck pain (NP) and 10 painfree controls. M1 organisation was studied using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied to a grid over the skull and surface electromyography of DNF (pharyngeal electrode) and SNF. Three-dimensional maps of M1 representation of each muscle were generated. Peaks in the SNF map that represented the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) and platysma muscles were identified. Unique centre of gravity (CoG)/map peaks were identified for the three muscles. In comparison to painfree controls, NP participants had more medial location of the CoG/peak of DNF, SCM, and platysma, greater mediolateral variation in DNF CoG (p = 0.02), fewer SNF and DNF map peaks (p = 0.01). These data show that neck flexor muscle M1 maps relate to trunk, neck, and face areas of the motor homunculus. Differences in M1 representation in NP have some similarities and some differences with observations for other musculoskeletal pain conditions. Despite the small sample size, our data did reveal differences and is comparable to other similar studies. The results of this study should be interpreted with consideration of methodological issues.