Efficacy of single versus three sessions of high rate repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in chronic migraine and tension-type headache

Utility of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Chronic Daily Headache Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Management of chronic daily headaches (CDH) remains challenging due to the limited efficacy of standard prophylactic pharmacological measures. Several studies have reported that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can effectively treat chronic headaches. The objective was to determine the utility of rTMS for immediate post-treatment and sustained CDH prophylaxis.

RECENT FINDINGS

All procedures were conducted per PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched for controlled clinical trials that have tested the efficacy of rTMS on populations with CDH. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the 'meta' package in R to examine the post- vs. pre-rTMS changes in standardized headache intensity and frequency compared to sham-control conditions. Thirteen trials were included with a combined study population of N = 538 patients with CDH (rTMS, N = 284; Sham, N = 254). Patients exposed to rTMS had significantly reduced standardized CDH intensity and frequency in the immediate post-treatment period (Hedges' g = -1.16 [-1.89, -0.43], p = 0.002 and Δ = -5.07 [-10.05, -0.11], p = 0.045 respectively). However, these effects were sustained marginally in the follow-up period (Hedges' g = -0.43 [-0.76, -0.09], p = 0.012 and Δ = -3.33 [-5.52, -1.14], p = 0.003). Significant between-study heterogeneity was observed, at least partially driven by variations in rTMS protocols. Despite the observed clinically meaningful and statistically significant benefits in the immediate post-treatment period, the prophylactic effects of rTMS on CDH do not seem to sustain with discontinuation. Thus, the cost-effectiveness of the routine use of rTMS for CDH prophylaxis remains questionable.

REGISTRATION

Protocol preregistered in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021250100).

Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Quadripulse rTMS over the Visual Cortex: A Proof-of-Concept Study in Healthy Volunteers and Chronic Migraine Patients with Medication Overuse Headache

In chronic migraine with medication overuse (CM-MOH), sensitization of visual cortices is reflected by (i) increased amplitude of stimulus-evoked responses and (ii) habituation deficit during repetitive stimulation. Both abnormalities might be mitigated by inhibitory transcranial neurostimulation. Here, we tested an inhibitory quadripulse repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS-QPI) protocol to decrease durably visual cortex excitability in healthy subjects (HS) and explored its therapeutic potential in CM-MOH patients. Pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials (VEP) were used as biomarkers of effect and recorded before (T1), immediately after (T2), and 3 h after stimulation (T3). In HS, rTMS-QPI durably decreased the VEP 1st block amplitude (p < 0.05) and its habituation (p < 0.05). These changes were more pronounced for the P1N2 component that was modified already at T2 up to T3, while for N1P1 they were significant only at T3. An excitatory stimulation protocol (rTMS-QPE) tended to have an opposite effect, restricted to P1N2. In 12 CM-MOH patients, during a four-week treatment (2 sessions/week), rTMS-QPI significantly reduced monthly headache days (p < 0.01). In patients reversing from CM-MOH to episodic migraine (n = 6), VEP habituation significantly improved after treatment (p = 0.005). rTMS-QPI durably decreases visual cortex responsivity in healthy subjects. In a proof-of-concept study of CM-MOH patients, rTMS-QPI also has beneficial clinical and electrophysiological effects, but sham-controlled trials are needed.

Non-Pharmacological Treatment for Chronic Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic migraine (CM) affects a large proportion of the population and is a significant source of disability and lost productivity. Numerous non-pharmacological approaches have been attempted during the past decades. This review discusses the most recent and evidence-based advances in acute and preventive non-pharmacological therapeutic approaches for CM, offering alternatives to drug treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

A growing number of non-pharmacological treatment options, including non-invasive or invasive neuromodulation, acupuncture, psychotherapy, and physiotherapy, have shown promising efficacy in CM. There is strong evidence for the effectiveness of non-invasive neuromodulation such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in CM, but less evidence for approaches such as invasive neuromodulation, physical therapy, or dietary approaches. Acupuncture for migraine remains controversial, with the main point of contention still being the placebo effect. Non-pharmacological approaches can be offered as a reliable alternative for patients with CM, and more research is being done to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive neuromodulation with different parameters and the combination of different treatments in CM.

Network Meta-analysis of Different Treatments for Vestibular Migraine

INTRODUCTION

Although one of the major presentations of vestibular migraine is dizziness with/without unsteady gait, it is still classified as one of the migraine categories. However, in contrast to ordinary migraine, vestibular migraine patients have distinct characteristics, and the detailed treatment strategy for vestibular migraine is different and more challenging than ordinary migraine treatment. Currently, there is no conclusive evidence regarding its management, including vestibular migraine prophylaxis.

AIM

The objective of this current network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of individual treatment strategies in patients with vestibular migraine.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, Web of Science, ClinicalKey, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a final literature search date of 30 December 2022. Patients diagnosed with vestibular migraine were included. The PICO of the current study included (1) patients with vestibular migraine; (2) intervention: any active pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic intervention; (3) comparator: placebo-control, active control, or waiting list; and (4) outcome: changes in migraine frequency or severity. This NMA of RCTs of vestibular migraine treatment was conducted using a frequentist model. We arranged inconsistency and similarity tests to re-examine the assumption of NMA, and also conducted a subgroup analysis focusing on RCTs of pharmacological treatment for vestibular migraine management. The primary outcome was changes in the frequency of vestibular migraines, while the secondary outcomes were changes in vestibular migraine severity and acceptability. Acceptability was set as the dropout rate, which was defined as the participant leaving the study before the end of the trial for any reason. Two authors independently evaluated the risk of bias for each domain using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials (N = 828, mean age 37.6 years, 78.4% female) and seven active regimens were included. We determined that only valproic acid (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.69, -0.54), propranolol (SMD -1.36, 95% CI -2.55, -0.17), and venlafaxine (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.32, -0.18) were significantly associated with better improvement in vestibular migraine frequency than the placebo/control groups. Furthermore, among all the investigated pharmacologic/non-pharmacologic treatments, valproic acid yielded the greatest decrease in vestibular migraine frequency among all the interventions. In addition, most pharmacologic/non-pharmacologic treatments were associated with similar acceptability (i.e. dropout rate) as those of the placebo/control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study provides evidence that only valproic acid, propranolol, and venlafaxine might be associated with beneficial efficacy in vestibular migraine treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42023388343.

Migraine: Advances in the Pathogenesis and Treatment

This article presents a comprehensive review on migraine, a prevalent neurological disorder characterized by chronic headaches, by focusing on their pathogenesis and treatment advances. By examining molecular markers and leveraging imaging techniques, the research identifies key mechanisms and triggers in migraine pathology, thereby improving our understanding of its pathophysiology. Special emphasis is given to the role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in migraine development. CGRP not only contributes to symptoms but also represents a promising therapeutic target, with inhibitors showing effectiveness in migraine management. The article further explores traditional medical treatments, scrutinizing the mechanisms, benefits, and limitations of commonly prescribed medications. This provides a segue into an analysis of emerging therapeutic strategies and their potential to enhance migraine management. Finally, the paper delves into neuromodulation as an innovative treatment modality. Clinical studies indicating its effectiveness in migraine management are reviewed, and the advantages and limitations of this technique are discussed. In summary, the article aims to enhance the understanding of migraine pathogenesis and present novel therapeutic possibilities that could revolutionize patient care.

Topographic localization of migraine triggers and its association with headache frequency and severity

OBJECTIVE

Internal biological rhythm with or without external trigger may precipitate migraine. Classifying exogenous and endogenous triggers to a topographic localization may help in understanding the migraine. We report topographic localization of migraine triggers and its influence on headache frequency and severity.

METHODS

588 migraineurs, aged 16-69 years were included. Various endogenous and exogenous triggers were categorized to topographic localization- hypothalamic, pituitary, auditory, visual, somato-sensory, olfactory and gustatory. The relationship of topographic localization of triggers with episodic versus chronic migraine, and moderate versus severe headache were analyzed using univariate followed by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

All migraineurs had triggers 584(99.9%) except 4(0.1%) patients. Presence of multiple triggers (99.4%), and combination of both endogenous and exogenous triggers (97.7%) was the rule. On topographic localization, hypothalamic trigger was the commonest (98.1%) followed by visual (84.1%), auditory (82.1%), somatosensory (76.1%), olfactory (26.2%), pituitary (24.1%), and gustatory (6.6%). 98.6% patients had combination of hypothalamic with pituitary triggers. Hypothalamic [Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 4.50] and auditory triggers (AOR 0.34) independently predicted chronic migraine, and auditory (AOR 0.55) and gustatory (AOR 2.41) triggers predicted severity of headache.

CONCLUSION

Hypothalamic triggers are the commonest suggesting an innate susceptibility of migraine. Auditory trigger may precipitate frequent and severe headache.

Non-invasive brain stimulation treatments for migraine prophylaxis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Migraine is a major public health problem owing to its long disease duration and disease relapse. Non-invasive brain stimulation treatments were reported effective for the management of migraine, but the comparative effectiveness of three main NIBSs, rTMS, nVNS, and tDCS, has not been studied. We aimed to explore the relative efficacy of rTMS, tDCS, and nVNS in migraine prophylaxis by using network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

We searched OVID Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, and Web of Science from inception to 1 January 2022. Randomized controlled trials that reported the efficacy of rTMS, tDCS or nVNS in the prophylactic treatment of migraine were included. The primary outcome was monthly migraine frequency, and secondary outcomes were headache intensity and the impact of headaches on daily life. The relative effects of the treatments in contrast to the others were measured by using standard mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

We included 31 trials with 1659 participants. Fourteen trials were rated as low risk of bias. The results showed that tDCS (SMD - 1.58; 95%CI, - 2.38 to  - 0.79; P-score = 0.92) had the largest effect on migraine frequency when compared with sham interventions in reducing monthly migraine frequency, and tDCS had a larger effect than rTMS (SMD - 0.62; 95%CI, - 1.81 to 0.57) and nVNS (SMD - 1.39; 95%CI, - 3.27 to 0.49). tDCS had also the largest effect in reducing pain intensity when compared with sham intervention (SMD - 1.49; 95%CI, - 2.46 to  - 0.52) and rTMS (SMD - 0.48; 95%CI, - 2.06 to 1.09).

CONCLUSIONS

For the prophylactic treatment of migraine, tDCS was relatively more effective than rTMS and nVNS. Head-to-head comparison trials are needed to confirm the findings.

Evidence from Indian studies on safety and efficacy of therapeutic transcranial magnetic stimulation across neuropsychiatric disorders- A systematic review and meta-analysis

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is potentially effective as an augmentation strategy in the treatment of many neuropsychiatric conditions. Several Indian studies have been conducted in this regard. We aimed to quantitatively synthesize evidence from Indian studies assessing efficacy and safety of rTMS across broad range of neuropsychiatric conditions. Fifty two studies- both randomized controlled and non-controlled studies were included for a series of random-effects meta-analyses. Pre-post intervention effects of rTMS efficacy were estimated in "active only" rTMS treatment arms/groups and "active vs sham" (sham-controlled) studies using pooled Standardized Mean Differences (SMDs). The outcomes were 'any depression', depression in unipolar/bipolar depressive disorder, depression in obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), depression in schizophrenia, schizophrenia symptoms (positive, negative, total psychopathology, auditory hallucinations and cognitive deficits), obsessive compulsive symptoms of OCD, mania, craving/compulsion in substance use disorders (SUDs) and migraine (headache severity and frequency). Frequencies and odds ratios (OR) for adverse events were calculated. Methodological quality of included studies, publication bias and sensitivity assessment for each meta-analyses was conducted. Meta-analyses of "active only" studies suggested a significant effect of rTMS for all outcomes, with moderate to large effect sizes, at both end of treatment as well as at follow-up. However, except for migraine (headache severity and frequency) with large effect sizes at end of treatment only and craving in alcohol dependence where moderate effect size at follow-up only, rTMS was not found to be effective for any outcome in the series of "active vs sham" meta-analyses. Significant heterogeneity was seen. Serious adverse events were rare. Publication bias was common and the sham controlled positive results lost significance in sensitivity analysis. We conclude that rTMS is safe and shows positive results in 'only active' treatment groups for all the studied neuropsychiatric conditions. However, the sham-controlled evidence for efficacy is negative from India.

Conclusion

rTMS is safe and shows positive results in "only active" treatment groups for all the studied neuropsychiatric conditions. However, the sham-controlled evidence for efficacy is negative from India.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Primary Motor Cortex beyond Motor Rehabilitation: A Review of the Current Evidence

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a novel technique to stimulate the human brain through the scalp. Over the years, identifying the optimal brain region and stimulation parameters has been a subject of debate in the literature on therapeutic uses of repetitive TMS (rTMS). Nevertheless, the primary motor cortex (M1) has been a conventional target for rTMS to treat motor symptoms, such as hemiplegia and spasticity, as it controls the voluntary movement of the body. However, with an expanding knowledge base of the M1 cortical and subcortical connections, M1-rTMS has shown a therapeutic efficacy that goes beyond the conventional motor rehabilitation to involve pain, headache, fatigue, dysphagia, speech and voice impairments, sleep disorders, cognitive dysfunction, disorders of consciousness, anxiety, depression, and bladder dysfunction. In this review, we summarize the latest evidence on using M1-rTMS to treat non-motor symptoms of diverse etiologies and discuss the potential mechanistic rationale behind the management of each of these symptoms.

Effectiveness and acceptability of noninvasive brain and nerve stimulation techniques for migraine prophylaxis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Current pharmacologic prophylactic strategies for migraine have exhibited limited efficacy, with response rates as low as 40%-50%. In addition to the limited efficacy, the acceptability of those pharmacologic prophylactic strategies were unacceptable. Although noninvasive brain/nerve stimulation strategies may be effective, the evidence has been inconsistent. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare strategies of noninvasive brain/nerve stimulation for migraine prophylaxis with respect to their effectiveness and acceptability.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov , ClinicalKey, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched to date of June 4th, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patients with diagnosis of migraine, either episodic migraine or chronic migraine, were included. All NMA procedures were conducted under the frequentist model.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs were included (N = 1493; mean age = 38.2 years; 82.0% women). We determined that the high frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over C3 yielded the most decreased monthly migraine days among all the interventions [mean difference = - 8.70 days, 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs): - 14.45 to - 2.95 compared to sham/control groups]. Only alternating frequency (2/100 Hz) transcutaneous occipital nerve stimulation (tONS) over the Oz (RR = 0.36, 95%CIs: 0.16 to 0.82) yielded a significantly lower drop-out rate than the sham/control groups did.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study provided a new direction for the design of more methodologically robust and larger RCTs based on the findings of the potentially beneficial effect on migraine prophylaxis in participants with migraine by different noninvasive brain/nerve stimulation, especially the application of rTMS and tONS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42021252638. The current study had been approval by the Institutional Review Board of the Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center (TSGHIRB No. B-109-29).

Evidence Mapping Based on Systematic Reviews of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on the Motor Cortex for Neuropathic Pain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There is vast published literature proposing repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) technology on the motor cortex (M1) for the treatment of neuropathic pain (NP). Systematic reviews (SRs) focus on a specific problem and do not provide a comprehensive overview of a research area. This study aimed to summarize and analyze the evidence of rTMS on the M1 for NP treatment through a new synthesis method called evidence mapping.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and The Cochrane Library to identify the studies that summarized the effectiveness of rTMS for NP. The study type was restricted to SRs with or without meta-analysis. All literature published before January 23, 2021, was included. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted the data. The methodological quality of the included SRs was assessed by using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2). Data were extracted following a defined population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework from primary studies that included SRs. The same PICO was categorized into PICOs according to interventions [frequency, number of sessions (short: 1-5 sessions, medium: 5-10 sessions, and long: >10 sessions)] and compared. The evidence map was presented in tables and a bubble plot.

RESULTS

A total of 38 SRs met the eligibility criteria. After duplicate primary studies were removed, these reviews included 70 primary studies that met the scope of evidence mapping. According to the AMSTAR-2 assessment, the quality of the included SRs was critically low. Of these studies, 34 SRs scored "critically low" in terms of methodological quality, 2 SR scored "low," 1 SR scored "moderate," and 1 SR scored "high."

CONCLUSION

Evidence mapping is a useful methodology to provide a comprehensive and reliable overview of studies on rTMS for NP. Evidence mapping also shows that further investigations are necessary to highlight the optimal stimulation protocols and standardize all parameters to fill the evidence gaps of rTMS. Given that the methodological quality of most included SRs was "critically low," further investigations are advised to improve the methodological quality and the reporting process of SRs.

Neuromodulation for Chronic Daily Headache

Purpose of Review

We reviewed the literature that explored the use of central and peripheral neuromodulation techniques for chronic daily headache (CDH) treatment.

Recent Findings

Although the more invasive deep brain stimulation (DBS) is effective in chronic cluster headache (CCH), it should be reserved for extremely difficult-to-treat patients. Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation has shown similar efficacy to DBS and is less risky in both CCH and chronic migraine (CM). Non-invasive transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation is a promising add-on treatment for CCH but not for CM. Transcutaneous external trigeminal nerve stimulation may be effective in treating CM; however, it has not yet been tested for cluster headache. Transcranial magnetic and electric stimulations have promising preventive effects against CM and CCH.

Summary

Although the precise mode of action of non-invasive neuromodulation techniques remains largely unknown and there is a paucity of controlled trials, they should be preferred to more invasive techniques for treating CDH.

Update of Neuromodulation in Chronic Migraine

Purpose of Review

Neuromodulation devices have become an attractive alternative to traditional pharmacotherapy for migraine, especially for patients intolerant to medication or who prefer non-pharmacological options. In the past decades, many studies demonstrated the efficacy of neuromodulation devices in patients with episodic migraine (EM). However, the benefit of these devices on chronic migraine (CM), which is typically more debilitating and refractory than EM, remains not well studied.

Recent Findings

We reviewed the literature within the last five years on using FDA-cleared and investigational devices for CM. There were eight randomized controlled trials and 15 open-label observational studies on ten neuromodulation devices.

Summary

Neuromodulation is promising for use in CM, although efficacy varies among devices or individuals. Noninvasive devices are usually considered safe with minimal adverse events. However, stimulation protocol and methodology differ between studies. More well-designed studies adhering to the guideline may facilitate FDA clearance and better insurance coverage.

Chronic Migraine Pathophysiology and Treatment: A Review of Current Perspectives

Chronic migraine is a disabling neurological disorder that imposes a considerable burden on individual and socioeconomic outcomes. Chronic migraine is defined as headaches occurring on at least 15 days per month with at least eight of these fulfilling the criteria for migraine. Chronic migraine typically evolves from episodic migraine as a result of increasing attack frequency and/or several other risk factors that have been implicated with migraine chronification. Despite this evolution, chronic migraine likely develops into its own distinct clinical entity, with unique features and pathophysiology separating it from episodic migraine. Furthermore, chronic migraine is characterized with higher disability and incidence of comorbidities in comparison to episodic migraine. While existing migraine studies primarily focus on episodic migraine, less is known about chronic migraine pathophysiology. Mounting evidence on aberrant alterations suggest that pronounced functional and structural brain changes, central sensitization and neuroinflammation may underlie chronic migraine mechanisms. Current treatment options for chronic migraine include risk factor modification, acute and prophylactic therapies, evidence-based treatments such as onabotulinumtoxinA, topiramate and newly approved calcitonin gene-related peptide or receptor targeted monoclonal antibodies. Unfortunately, treatments are still predominantly ineffective in aborting migraine attacks and decreasing intensity and frequency, and poor adherence and compliance with preventative medications remains a significant challenge. Novel emerging chronic migraine treatments such as neuromodulation offer promising therapeutic approaches that warrant further investigation. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an update of current knowledge and perspectives regarding chronic migraine background, pathophysiology, current and emerging treatment options with the intention of facilitating future research into this debilitating and largely indeterminant disorder.

Revised guidelines of the French headache society for the diagnosis and management of migraine in adults. Part 3: Non-pharmacological treatment

The French Headache Society proposes updated French guidelines for the management of migraine. This article presents the third part of the guidelines, which is focused on the non-pharmacological treatment of migraine, including physical exercise, dietary supplements and plants, diets, neuromodulation therapies, acupuncture, behavioral interventions and mindfulness therapy, patent foramen ovale closure and surgical nerve decompression.

Non-Invasive Neurostimulation Methods for Acute and Preventive Migraine Treatment-A Narrative Review

Neurostimulation methods have now been studied for more than 20 years in migraine treatment. They can be divided into invasive and non-invasive methods. In this narrative review, the non-invasive methods are presented. The most commonly studied and used methods are vagal nerve stimulation, electric peripheral nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcranial direct current stimulation. Other stimulation techniques, including mechanical stimulation, play only a minor role. Nearly all methods have been studied for acute attack treatment and for the prophylactic treatment of migraine. The evidence of efficacy is poor for most procedures, since no stimulation device is based on consistently positive, blinded, controlled trials with a sufficient number of patients. In addition, most studies on these devices enrolled patients who did not respond sufficiently to oral drug treatment, and so the role of neurostimulation in an average population of migraine patients is unknown. In the future, it is very important to conduct large, properly blinded and controlled trials performed by independent researchers. Otherwise, neurostimulation methods will only play a very minor role in the treatment of migraine.

Treatment of Persistent Post-Concussion Syndrome with Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Using Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy as a Biomarker of Response: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial Protocol (Preprint)

Background

Approximately one-third of all concussions lead to persistent postconcussion syndrome (PPCS). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a form of noninvasive brain stimulation that has been extensively used to treat refractory major depressive disorder and has a strong potential to be used as a treatment for patients with PPCS. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) has already been used as a tool to assess patients with PPCS and may provide insight into the pathophysiology of rTMS treatment in patients with PPCS.

Objective

The primary objective of this research is to determine whether rTMS treatment improves symptom burden in patients with PPCS compared to sham treatment using the Rivermead postconcussion symptom questionnaire. The secondary objective is to explore the neuropathophysiological changes that occur following rTMS in participants with PPCS using fNIRS. Exploratory objectives include determining whether rTMS treatment in participants with PPCS will also improve quality of life, anxiety, depressive symptoms, cognition, posttraumatic stress, and function secondary to headaches.

Methods

A total of 44 adults (18-65 years old) with PPCS (>3 months to 5 years) will participate in a double-blind, sham-controlled, concealed allocation, randomized clinical trial. The participants will engage in either a 4-week rTMS treatment protocol or sham rTMS protocol (20 treatments). The left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex will be located through Montreal Neurologic Institute coordinates. The intensity of the rTMS treatment over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex will be 120% of resting motor threshold, with a frequency of 10 Hz, 10 trains of 60 pulses per train (total of 600 pulses), and intertrain interval of 45 seconds. Prior to starting the rTMS treatment, participant and injury characteristics, questionnaires (symptom burden, quality of life, depression, anxiety, cognition, and headache), and fNIRS assessment will be collected. Repeat questionnaires and fNIRS will occur immediately after rTMS treatment and at 1 month and 3 months post rTMS. Outcome parameters will be analyzed by a 2-way (treatment × time) mixed analysis of variance.

Results

As of May 6, 2021, 5 participants have been recruited for the study, and 3 have completed the rTMS protocol. The estimated completion date of the trial is May 2022.

Conclusions

This trial will expand our knowledge of how rTMS can be used as a treatment option of PPCS and will explore the neuropathophysiological response of rTMS through fNIRS analysis.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04568369; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04568369

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/31308

Neuromodulation techniques for acute and preventive migraine treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Several neuromodulation methods exists for migraine treatment. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on migraine treatment using neurostimulation methods.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase up to July 1, 2020 for RCTs reporting acute or preventive treatment of migraine with either non-invasive or invasive neurostimulation methods. Two researchers independently assessed the eligibility of the retrieved studies and extracted data. Outcomes for the quantitative synthesis were 2 h pain free for acute treatment and headache days per month for preventive treatment. We performed subgroup analyses by treatment (stimulation method and site of application). Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight articles were included in the qualitative analysis (7 acute, 31 preventive) and 34 in the quantitative evaluation (6 acute, 28 preventive). Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) was effective for acute treatment. Data were insufficient to draw conclusions for any other techniques (single studies). Invasive occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was effective for migraine prevention, with a large effect size but considerable heterogeneity, whereas supra-orbital transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PENS), and high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) were effective, with small to medium effect sizes. Vagus-nerve stimulation, left prefrontal cortex rTMS, and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the M1 had no significant effect and heterogeneity was high.

CONCLUSION

Several neuromodulation methods are of potential interest for migraine management, but the quality of the evidence is very poor. Future large and well-conducted studies are needed and could improve on the present results.

Neuronavigation based 10 sessions of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy in chronic migraine: an exploratory study

INTRODUCTION

Chronic migraine is a disease of altered cortical excitability. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation provides a novel non-invasive method to target the nociceptive circuits in the cortex. Motor cortex is one such potential target. In this study, we targeted the left motor cortex using fMRI-guided neuronavigation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty right-handed patients were randomized into real and sham rTMS group. Baseline subjective pain assessments were done using visual analog scale (VAS) and questionnaires: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Becks Depression Inventory, and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Objectively, pain was assessed by means of thermal pain thresholds using quantitative sensory testing. For corticomotor excitability parameters, resting motor thresholds and motor-evoked potentials were mapped. For rTMS total, 600 pulses in 10 trains at 10 Hz with an intertrain interval of 60 s were delivered in each session. Ten such sessions were given 5 days per week over 2 consecutive weeks. The duration of each session was 10 min. Real rTMS was administered at 70% of Resting MT. All the tests were repeated post-intervention and after 1 month of follow-up. There are no studies reporting the use of fMRI-based TMS for targeting the motor cortex in CM patients.

RESULTS

We observed a significant reduction in the mean VAS rating, headache frequency, and MIDAS questionnaire in real rTMS group which was maintained after 1 month of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Ten sessions of fMRI-based rTMS over the left motor cortex may provide long-term pain relief in CM, but further studies are warranted to confirm our preliminary findings.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Pain, Headache, and Comorbid Depression: INS-NANS Expert Consensus Panel Review and Recommendation

BACKGROUND

While transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been studied for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, emerging evidence supports its use for pain and headache by stimulating either motor cortex (M1) or dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). However, its clinical implementation is hindered due to a lack of consensus in the quality of clinical evidence and treatment recommendation/guideline(s). Thus, working collaboratively, this multinational multidisciplinary expert panel aims to: 1) assess and rate the existing outcome evidence of TMS in various pain/headache conditions; 2) provide TMS treatment recommendation/guidelines for the evaluated conditions and comorbid depression; and 3) assess the cost-effectiveness and technical issues relevant to the long-term clinical implementation of TMS for pain and headache.

METHODS

Seven task groups were formed under the guidance of a 5-member steering committee with four task groups assessing the utilization of TMS in the treatment of Neuropathic Pain (NP), Acute Pain, Primary Headache Disorders, and Posttraumatic Brain Injury related Headaches (PTBI-HA), and remaining three assessing the treatment for both pain and comorbid depression, and the cost-effectiveness and technological issues relevant to the treatment.

RESULTS

The panel rated the overall level of evidence and recommendability for clinical implementation of TMS as: 1) high and extremely/strongly for both NP and PTBI-HA respectively; 2) moderate for postoperative pain and migraine prevention, and recommendable for migraine prevention. While the use of TMS for treating both pain and depression in one setting is clinically and financially sound, more studies are required to fully assess the long-term benefit of the treatment for the two highly comorbid conditions, especially with neuronavigation.

CONCLUSIONS

After extensive literature review, the panel provided recommendations and treatment guidelines for TMS in managing neuropathic pain and headaches. In addition, the panel also recommended more outcome and cost-effectiveness studies to assess the feasibility of the long-term clinical implementation of the treatment.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): An update (2014-2018)

A group of European experts reappraised the guidelines on the therapeutic efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) previously published in 2014 [Lefaucheur et al., Clin Neurophysiol 2014;125:2150-206]. These updated recommendations take into account all rTMS publications, including data prior to 2014, as well as currently reviewed literature until the end of 2018. Level A evidence (definite efficacy) was reached for: high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the painful side for neuropathic pain; HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) using a figure-of-8 or a H1-coil for depression; low-frequency (LF) rTMS of contralesional M1 for hand motor recovery in the post-acute stage of stroke. Level B evidence (probable efficacy) was reached for: HF-rTMS of the left M1 or DLPFC for improving quality of life or pain, respectively, in fibromyalgia; HF-rTMS of bilateral M1 regions or the left DLPFC for improving motor impairment or depression, respectively, in Parkinson's disease; HF-rTMS of ipsilesional M1 for promoting motor recovery at the post-acute stage of stroke; intermittent theta burst stimulation targeted to the leg motor cortex for lower limb spasticity in multiple sclerosis; HF-rTMS of the right DLPFC in posttraumatic stress disorder; LF-rTMS of the right inferior frontal gyrus in chronic post-stroke non-fluent aphasia; LF-rTMS of the right DLPFC in depression; and bihemispheric stimulation of the DLPFC combining right-sided LF-rTMS (or continuous theta burst stimulation) and left-sided HF-rTMS (or intermittent theta burst stimulation) in depression. Level A/B evidence is not reached concerning efficacy of rTMS in any other condition. The current recommendations are based on the differences reached in therapeutic efficacy of real vs. sham rTMS protocols, replicated in a sufficient number of independent studies. This does not mean that the benefit produced by rTMS inevitably reaches a level of clinical relevance.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Pediatric Neurological Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a form of noninvasive brain stimulation that is used for the treatment of migraine and major depression in adults and is now being evaluated for use in other disorders. The purpose of this review is to summarize the physiology underlying TMS, the safety and tolerability in pediatric patients, and the evidence for TMS efficacy in the treatment of pediatric neurologic disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies investigating rTMS for adolescent depression, hemiparesis due to pediatric stroke, autism, and tics/Tourette syndrome have demonstrated some therapeutic benefit. rTMS has been insufficiently studied for migraine in children despite benefits demonstrated for adult migraine. Evidence for rTMS in childhood epilepsy and ADHD remains mixed. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is emerging as a safe, tolerable, and potentially effective therapeutic strategy in a number of pediatric neurological disorders, though high-quality, randomized controlled trials are needed. Ongoing studies should focus on optimization of treatment protocols, development of biomarkers to identify children who will benefit from the technique, and identification of the most appropriate indicators of response.

Treatment of Persistent Post-Traumatic Headache and Post-Concussion Symptoms Using Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Pilot, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

Persistent post-traumatic headache (PTH) after mild traumatic brain injury is one of the most prominent and highly reported persistent post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). Non-pharmacological treatments, including non-invasive neurostimulation technologies, have been proposed for use. Our objective was to evaluate headache characteristics at 1 month after repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) treatment in participants with PTH and PPCS. A double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, pilot clinical trial was performed on 20 participants (18-65 years) with persistent PTH (International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition) and PPCS (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision). Ten sessions of rTMS therapy (10 Hz, 600 pulses, 70% resting motor threshold amplitude) were delivered to the left dorsolateral pre-frontal cortex. The primary outcome was a change in headache frequency or severity at 1 month post-rTMS. Two-week-long daily headache diaries and clinical questionnaires assessing function, PPCS, cognition, quality of life, and mood were completed at baseline, post-treatment, and at 1, 3, and 6 months post-rTMS. A two-way (treatment × time) mixed analyisis of variance indicated a significant overall time effect for average headache severity (F_(3,54) = 3.214; p = 0.03) and a reduction in headache frequency at 1 month post-treatment (#/2 weeks, REAL -5.2 [standard deviation {SD} = 5.8]; SHAM, -3.3 [SD = 7.7]). Secondary outcomes revealed an overall time interaction for headache impact, depression, post-concussion symptoms, and quality of life. There was a significant reduction in depression rating in the REAL group between baseline and 1 month post-treatment, with no change in the SHAM group (Personal Health Questionnaire-9; REAL, -4.3 [SD = 3.7[ p = 0.020]; SHAM, -0.7 [SD = 4.7; p = 1.0]; Bonferroni corrected). In the REAL group, 60% returned to work whereas only 10% returned in the SHAM group (p = 0.027). This pilot study demonstrates an overall time effect on headache severity, functional impact, depression, PPCS, and quality of life after rTMS treatment in participants with persistent PTH; however, findings were below clinical significance thresholds. There was a 100% response rate, no dropouts, and minimal adverse effects, warranting a larger phase II study. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03691272.

Using Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy to Study the Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Concussion: A Two-Patient Case Study

Background: Approximately 25% of concussion patients experience persistent post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been explored as a treatment, and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) may be a cost-effective method for assessing response. Objectives: Evaluate rTMS for the treatment of PPCS and introduce fNIRS as a method of assessing treatment response. Methods: Design: Two-patient case study. Setting: Calgary Brain Injury Program. Participants: 47 and 49 years. male, with PPCS for 1-2 years (headache, cognitive difficulties, nausea, visual difficulties, irritability, anxiety, poor mood, sleep, and fatigue). Intervention: 10 sessions of rTMS therapy to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), at 10 Hz (600 pulses) and 70% of resting motor threshold amplitude. Participants completed an 8-week headache diary and a battery of clinical questionnaires prior to each fNIRS session. fNIRS: Hemodynamic changes were recorded over the frontoparietal cortex during rest, finger tapping, and a graded working memory test. fNIRS was completed pre-rTMS, following rTMS (day 14), and at 1-month post-rTMS (day 45). For comparison, two healthy, sex-matched controls were scanned with fNIRS once daily for five consecutive days. Results: Clinical scores improved (headache severity, MoCA, HIT-6, PHQ-9, GAD-7, QOLIBRI, RPSQ, BCPSI) or remained stable (PCL-5, headache frequency) post-rTMS, for both participants. Participant 1 reported moderate symptom burden, and a fNIRS task-evoked hemodynamic response showing increased oxyhemoglobin was observed following a working memory task, as expected. Participant 2 exhibited a high symptom burden pre-treatment, with abnormal fNIRS hemodynamic response where oxyhemoglobin declined, in response to task. One month following rTMS treatment, participant 2 had a normal fNIRS hemodynamic response to task, corresponding to significant improvements in clinical outcomes. Conclusion: This case study suggests fNIRS may be sensitive to physiological changes that accompany rTMS treatment. Further studies exploring fNIRS as a cost-effective technology for monitoring rTMS response in patients with PPCS are suggested.

Antidepressant Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Over Prefrontal Cortex of Parkinson's Disease Patients With Depression: A Meta-Analysis

Objective: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the antidepressant effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the prefrontal cortex (PFC) of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and to determine the optimal rTMS parameters, such as the intensity, frequency and the delivered pattern of rTMS stimulation. Methods: EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Cochrane data bases were researched for papers published before March 12, 2018. Studies investigating the anti-depression effects of rTMS over PFC in patients with PD were considered. The main outcomes of pre- and post-rTMS treatment as well as score changes were all extracted. The mean effect size was estimated by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) by using fixed or random effect models as appropriate. Results: Nine studies containing 137 PD patients with depression were included. The pooled results showed significant pre-post anti-depressive effects of rTMS over PFC in PD patients with depression (SMD = -0.80, P < 0.00001). The subgroup analyses of stimulation intensity, frequencies, and models also revealed significant effects (Intensities: 90% RMT: SMD = -1.16, P = 0.0006; >100% RMT: SMD = -0.82, P < 0.0001. Frequencies: < 1.0 Hz: SMD = -0.83, P = 0.03; 5.0 Hz: SMD = -1.10, P < 0.0001; ≥10.0 Hz: SMD = -0.55, P = 0.02. Models: Continuous: SMD = -0.79, P < 0.0001; Discontinuous: SMD = -0.84, P = 0.02). But the results of the studies with place-controlled designs were not significant (Overall: SMD = -0.27, P = 0.54. Intensities: 90% RMT: SMD = 0.27, P = 0.68; 100% RMT: SMD = -0.32, P = 0.33. Frequencies: 5.0 Hz: SMD = -0.87, P = 0.10; ≥10.0 Hz: SMD = 0.27, P = 0.66. Models: Continuous: SMD = -0.28, P = 0.68; Discontinuous: SMD = -0.32, P = 0.33). The greater effect sizes of rTMS with 90% RMT, 5.0 Hz in discontinuous days can be observed rather than the other parameters in both kinds of analyses across study design. Conclusions: rTMS may have a significant positive pre-post anti-depressive effect over PFC on patients with depression, especially by using 5.0 Hz frequency with 90% RMT intensity in discontinuous days, which may produce better effects than other parameters. The real effect, though, was not different from that of the placebo. Future studies with larger sample sizes and high-quality studies are needed to further corroborate our results and to identify the optimal rTMS protocols.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as a treatment for chronic dizziness following mild traumatic brain injury

A 61-year-old man sustained a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) following a pedestrian versus vehicle traffic accident. Post injury, he began to experience symptoms including light-headedness, spatial disorientation, nausea, fatigue and prominent dizziness brought on by postural change, physical activity or eye movements. Symptoms of dizziness persisted for over 5 years, despite numerous extensive and rigorous vestibular and vision therapy regimens. All investigations suggested normal peripheral and central vestibular functioning. The patient underwent 10 sessions of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) treatment, with stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at 70% of resting motor threshold and a frequency of 10 Hz. Dizziness symptom severity and frequency were reduced by greater than 50% at 3 months post treatment, with a clinically significant reduction of dizziness disability from 40 to 21 points on the Dizziness Handicap Inventory. We propose rTMS as a safe, effective and cost-effective treatment option for patients who experience persistent post-traumatic dizziness secondary to mTBI.

Repetitive magnetic stimulation promotes the proliferation of neural progenitor cells via modulating the expression of miR-106b

Increasing evidence shows that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) promotes neurogenesis and the expression of microRNA (miR)‑106b. The present study investigated whether rTMS promotes the proliferation of neural progenitor cells (NPCs) and whether the effect is associated with the expression of miR‑106b. NPCs were cultured from the rat hippocampus and exposed to rTMS daily, comprising 1,000 stimuli for 3 days at 10 Hz, with 1.75 T output. The proliferation ability of the NPCs was revealed by EdU staining, and the levels of miR‑106b and downstream gene p21 in the NPCs were measured by reverse transcription‑quantitative polymerase chain reaction and western blot analyses. For analysis of the mechanism, the NPCs were transfected with Lenti‑miR‑106b or small interfering RNAs prior to rTMS. The results showed that: i) rTMS increased NPC proliferation, as revealed by the increased proportion of EdU‑positive cells; ii) rTMS was able to upregulate the expression of miR‑106b and downregulate the level of p21 in NPCs; iii) overexpression of miR‑106b further enhanced the effects of rTMS, whereas knockdown of miR‑106b had the opposite effects. Taken together, these data indicated that rTMS can promote NPC proliferation by upregulating the expression of miR‑106b and possibly inhibiting the expression of p21.

Neuroimaging Mechanisms of Therapeutic Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder

Research into therapeutic transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for major depression has dramatically increased in the last decade. Understanding the mechanism of action of TMS is crucial to improve efficacy and develop the next generation of therapeutic stimulation. Early imaging research provided initial data supportive of widely held assumptions about hypothesized inhibitory or excitatory consequences of stimulation. Early work also indicated that while TMS modulated brain activity under the stimulation site, effects at deeper regions, in particular, the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex, were associated with clinical improvement. Concordant with earlier findings, functional connectivity studies also demonstrated that clinical improvements were related to changes distal, rather than proximal, to the site of stimulation. Moreover, recent work suggests that TMS modulates and potentially normalizes functional relationships between neural networks. An important observation that emerged from this review is that similar patterns of connectivity changes are observed across studies regardless of TMS parameters. Though promising, we stress that these imaging findings must be evaluated cautiously given the widespread reliance on modest sample sizes and little implementation of statistical validation. Additional limitations included use of imaging before and after a course of TMS, which provided little insight into changes that might occur during the weeks of stimulation. Furthermore, as studies to date have focused on depression, it is unclear whether our observations were related to mechanisms of action of TMS for depression or represented broader patterns of functional brain changes associated with clinical improvement.

High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the left DLPFC for major depression: Session-dependent efficacy: A meta-analysis

Background

Depression is a major debilitating psychiatric disorder. Current antidepressant drugs are often associated with side effects or treatment resistance. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate therapeutic effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) in major depression (MD).

Methods

The medical data bases of PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the therapeutic effects of high-frequency rTMS for depression, which were published in English between January 1990 and June 2016. The index terms were “depress*”, “depression” and “transcranial magnetic stimulation”. Depression outcome data of different sessions (5, 10, 15, and 20 sessions of rTMS treatment) were extracted and synthesized by calculating standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) by using a random-effect model. Within each session group, the subgroup analyses based on the number of pulses (≤ 1000, 1200–1500, 1600–1800, and 2000–3000) were also conducted.

Results

Thirty RCTs with a total of 1754 subjects including 1136 in the rTMS group and 618 in the sham group were included in this meta-analysis. rTMS had a significant overall therapeutic effect on depression severity scores (SMD = −0.73, P < 0.00001). The five, 10, 15, 20 sessions of rTMS treatments yielded the significant mean effect sizes of −0.43, −0.60, −1.13, and −2.74, respectively. In the four groups (5, 10, 15, 20 sessions), the maximal mean effect size was all obtained in the subgroup of 1200–1500 pulses per day (−0.97, −1.14, −1.91, −5.47; P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The increasing of HF-rTMS sessions is associated with the increased efficacy of HF-rTMS in reducing depressed patients’ symptom severity. A total number of pulses of 1200–1500 per day appear to deliver the best antidepressant effects of HF-rTMS.