Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) versus transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in the management of patients with fibromyalgia: A randomized controlled trial

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Fibromyalgia: Exploring the Necessity of Neuronavigation for Targeting New Brain Regions

Fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis are among the most prevalent rheumatic conditions worldwide. Nonpharmacological interventions have gained scientific endorsements as the preferred initial treatments before resorting to pharmacological modalities. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is among the most widely researched neuromodulation techniques, though it has not yet been officially recommended for fibromyalgia. This review aims to summarize the current evidence supporting rTMS for treating various fibromyalgia symptoms. Recent findings: High-frequency rTMS directed at the primary motor cortex (M1) has the strongest support in the literature for reducing pain intensity, with new research examining its long-term effectiveness. Nonetheless, some individuals may not respond to M1-targeted rTMS, and symptoms beyond pain can be prominent. Ongoing research aims to improve the efficacy of rTMS by exploring new brain targets, using innovative stimulation parameters, incorporating neuronavigation, and better identifying patients likely to benefit from this treatment. Summary: Noninvasive brain stimulation with rTMS over M1 is a well-tolerated treatment that can improve chronic pain and overall quality of life in fibromyalgia patients. However, the data are highly heterogeneous, with a limited level of evidence, posing a significant challenge to the inclusion of rTMS in official treatment guidelines. Research is ongoing to enhance its effectiveness, with future perspectives exploring its impact by targeting additional areas of the brain such as the medial prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, and inferior parietal lobe, as well as selecting the right patients who could benefit from this treatment.

Efficacy of neuromodulation on the treatment of fibromyalgia: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Several types of neuromodulation have been investigated for the treatment of fibromyalgia, but they show varied efficacy on pain, functioning, comorbid depression and comorbid anxiety. Whether some types of neuromodulation or some factors are associated with a better response also awaits clarification.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy of neuromodulation in patients with fibromyalgia. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PsycINFO before March 2022. We employed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Forty trials involving 1541 participants were included. Compared with sham control interventions, several types of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), and high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) were associated with significant reduction of pain, depression, anxiety, and improvement in functioning. Many significantly effective treatment options involve stimulation of the primary motor cortex or dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

CONCLUSION

We concluded that several types of rTMS, tDCS and tRNS may have the potential to be applied for clinical purposes.

Mechanisms of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for pain in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a recurrent pain condition that can be challenging to treat. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has become a promising non-invasive therapeutic option in alleviating FMS pain, but the mechanisms underlying its effectiveness are not yet fully understood. In this article, we discuss the most current research investigating the analgesic effects of tDCS on FMS and discuss the potential mechanisms. TDCS may exert its analgesic effects by influencing neuronal activity in the brain, altering cortical excitability, changing regional cerebral blood flow, modulating neurotransmission and neuroinflammation, and inducing neuroplasticity. Overall, evidence points to tDCS as a potentially safe and efficient pain relief choice for FMS by multiple underlying mechanisms. This article provides a thorough overview of our ongoing knowledge regarding the mechanisms underlying tDCS and emphasizes the possibility of further studies to improve the clinical utility of tDCS as a pain management tool.

The effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) on pain intensity of patients with fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic pain condition that affects millions of people worldwide. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that has shown promise as a potential treatment for FM by modulating pain perception and reducing symptoms, such as fatigue and depression. We aimed to systematically review studies that assess the effect of tDCS on pain reduction in FM patients.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane, and CINAHL Complete) were searched for records in English. Studies that measured the effect of tDCS on pain intensity in FM patients were included. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies. A random-effect model was preferred, and statistical analysis was performed by Stata software version 17.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included for qualitative, and eleven for quantitative analysis. Out of 664 patients included in the study, 443 were in the stimulation group. The left M1 area was the most common stimulation target (n = 12), and 2 mA was the most common stimulation amplitude (n = 19). The analysis showed that active tDCS significantly reduced pain intensity in FM patients in comparison to the sham group (SMD= -1.55; 95% CI -2.10, -0.99); also, no publication bias was noted.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review highlights the potential effect of tDCS on the reduction of pain intensity in FM patients. Additionally, this current evidence could suggest that tDCS applied at an intensity of 2mA to the left M1 is the most effective strategy.

Current Neurostimulation Therapies for Chronic Pain Conditions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neurostimulation treatment options have become more commonly used for chronic pain conditions refractory to these options. In this review, we characterize current neurostimulation therapies for chronic pain conditions and provide an analysis of their effectiveness and clinical adoption. This manuscript will inform clinicians of treatment options for chronic pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Non-invasive neurostimulation includes transcranial direct current stimulation and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, while more invasive options include spinal cord stimulation (SCS), peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation, motor cortex stimulation, and deep brain stimulation. Developments in transcranial direct current stimulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, spinal cord stimulation, and peripheral nerve stimulation render these modalities most promising for the alleviating chronic pain. Neurostimulation for chronic pain involves non-invasive and invasive modalities with varying efficacy. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are required to delineate the outcomes of neurostimulatory modalities more precisely.

Efficacy of electrophysical agents in fibromyalgia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of electrophysical agents in fibromyalgia.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PEDro, and Web of Science were searched from their inceptions to March 27, 2023.

METHODS

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022354326). Methodological quality of included trials was assessed using PEDro scale, and the quality of evidence was determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. The primary outcomes were pain, functional status, and mood.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies involving 3045 patients with fibromyalgia were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 47 (pain), 31 (functional status), and 26 (mood) for network meta-analysis. The network consistency model revealed that, when compared with true control, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and microcurrent improved pain symptoms (P = 0.006 and P = 0.037, respectively); repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation improved patient functional status (P = 0.018); and microcurrent (P = 0.001), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (P = 0.022), and no treatment (P = 0.038) significantly improved mood after intervention. Surface under the cumulative ranking indicated that microcurrent was most likely to be the best for managing pain and mood (surface under the cumulative ranking: 70% and 100%, respectively); low-level laser therapy for pain and mood (80% and 70%, respectively); and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for improving functional status and mood (80% and 70%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This review found low to moderate quality evidence that microcurrent, laser therapy, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation are the most effective electrophysical agents for improving at least one outcome in fibromyalgia.

Beyond trial-and-error: Individualizing therapeutic transcranial neuromodulation for chronic pain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to the motor cortex provides supplementary relief for some individuals with chronic pain who are refractory to pharmacological treatment. As rTMS slowly enters treatment guidelines for pain relief, its starts to be confronted with challenges long known to pharmacological approaches: efficacy at the group-level does not grant pain relief for a particular patient. In this review, we present and discuss a series of ongoing attempts to overcome this therapeutic challenge in a personalized medicine framework.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

Relevant scientific publications published in main databases such as PubMed and EMBASE from inception until March 2023 were systematically assessed, as well as a wide number of studies dedicated to the exploration of the mechanistic grounds of rTMS analgesic effects in humans, primates and rodents.

RESULTS

The main strategies reported to personalize cortical neuromodulation are: (i) the use of rTMS to predict individual response to implanted motor cortex stimulation; (ii) modifications of motor cortex stimulation patterns; (iii) stimulation of extra-motor targets; (iv) assessment of individual cortical networks and rhythms to personalize treatment; (v) deep sensory phenotyping; (vi) personalization of location, precision and intensity of motor rTMS. All approaches except (i) have so far low or moderate levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although current evidence for most strategies under study remains at best moderate, the multiple mechanisms set up by cortical stimulation are an advantage over single-target 'clean' drugs, as they can influence multiple pathophysiologic paths and offer multiple possibilities of individualization.

SIGNIFICANCE

Non-invasive neuromodulation is on the verge of personalised medicine. Strategies ranging from integration of detailed clinical phenotyping into treatment design to advanced patient neurophysiological characterisation are being actively explored and creating a framework for actual individualisation of care.

Are OMERACT recommendations followed in clinical trials on fibromyalgia? A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes and their measures

PURPOSE

Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and its measures (PROMs) are key to outcome assessment in Fibromyalgia (FM) trials. The aim of this review was to investigate which domains and instruments were assessed in recent FM trials and to compare them to recommendations by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) initiative. In addition, we investigated the overlap with a generic health assessment approach, i.e. eight domains suggested by the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®).

METHODS

In compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic literature search in scientific databases including PubMed, PsycInfo, and Embase was conducted to identify studies that assessed at least two dimensions of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from 2015 to June 2022. Non-randomized and randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. We extracted PROs and PROMs used in each study.

RESULTS

From 1845 identified records, 107 records out of 105 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies investigated 50 PROs using 126 different PROMs. Most frequently assessed domains were pain, depression, fatigue, and anxiety (> 95% of the studies). The disease-specific FIQ was the most frequently applied PROM (82%). Overall, only 9% of the studies covered all domains deemed mandatory by OMERACT. Very few studies covered all eight generic health domains suggested by PROMIS.

CONCLUSION

The majority of trials covered most OMERACT domains or generic PROMIS health domains. There was, however, great variability in the instruments used to assess the domains, which points at a limited degree of standardization in the field.

Treating fibromyalgia with electrical neuromodulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Several types of electrical neuromodulation (such as transcranial direct current stimulation, tDCS; transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) have been applied in the treatment of fibromyalgia. These trials had different outcome measurements, such as subjective pain, pain threshold, depression, anxiety, and functioning. We intended to integrate data from different trials into a meta-analysis to clearly present the clinical value of electrical neuromodulation in fibromyalgia.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of all types of electrical neuromodulation in patients with fibromyalgia was conducted. The main outcome was subjective pain; the secondary outcomes included depression, anxiety, and functioning.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies and 1061 fibromyalgia patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Active electrical neuromodulation and active tDCS both showed significant effects on subjective pain, depression, and functioning. For different anode tDCS electrode positions, only F3-F4 revealed a significant effect on depression. Meta-regression tDCS effects on depression were significantly associated with age.

CONCLUSIONS

Electrical neuromodulation is significantly effective in treating pain, depression, and functioning in patients with fibromyalgia.

SIGNIFICANCE

The results may help clinicians to arrange effective treatment plans for patients with fibromyalgia, especially in those patients who reveal limited response to pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy.

Non-Invasive Electric and Magnetic Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Fibromyalgia

Although fibromyalgia is defined by its core muscular nociceptive component, it also includes multiple dysfunctions that involve the musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, immune, endocrine, as well as the central and peripheral nervous systems, amongst others. The pathogenic involvement of the nervous system and the numerous neurological and neuroinflammatory symptoms of this disease may benefit from neuromodulatory stimulation techniques that have been shown to be effective and safe in diverse nervous system pathologies. In this systematic review, we outline current evidence showing the potential of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, such as therapeutic strategies in fibromyalgia. In addition, we evaluate the contribution of these tools to the exploration of the neurophysiological characteristics of fibromyalgia. Considering that the pathogenesis of this disease is unknown, these approaches do not aim to causally treat this syndrome, but to significantly reduce a range of key symptoms and thus improve the quality of life of the patients.

Is transcranial direct current stimulation beneficial for treating pain, depression, and anxiety symptoms in patients with chronic pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is often accompanied by emotional dysfunction. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used for reducing pain, depressive and anxiety symptoms in chronic pain patients, but its therapeutic effect remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain the treatment effect of tDCS on pain, depression, and anxiety symptoms of patients suffering from chronic pain, and potential factors that modulate the effectiveness of tDCS.

METHODS

Literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 2022. Randomized controlled trials that reported the effects of tDCS on pain and depression and anxiety symptoms in patients with chronic pain were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included in this review. Overall pooled results indicated that the use of tDCS can effectively alleviate short-term pain intensity [standard mean difference (SMD): -0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.75 to -0.12, P = 0.007] and depressive symptoms (SMD: -0.31, 95% CI, -0.47 to -0.14, P < 0.001), middle-term depressive symptoms (SMD: -0.35, 95% CI: -0.58 to -0.11, P = 0.004), long-term depressive symptoms (ES: -0.38, 95% CI: -0.64 to -0.13, P = 0.003) and anxiety symptoms (SMD: -0.26, 95% CI: -0.51 to -0.02, P = 0.03) compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

tDCS may be an effective short-term treatment for the improvement of pain intensity and concomitant depression and anxiety symptoms in chronic pain patients. Stimulation site, stimulation frequency, and type of chronic pain were significant influence factors for the therapeutic effect of tDCS.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=297693, identifier: CRD42022297693.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain and Neuropsychiatric Symptoms in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Neuropathic pain and neuropsychiatric symptoms are common complications reported by the traumatic brain injury (TBI) population. Although a growing body of research has indicated the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the management of neurological and psychiatric disorders, little evidence has been presented to support the effects of rTMS on neuropathic pain and neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients with TBI in all age groups. In addition, a better understanding of the potential factors that might influence the therapeutic effect of rTMS is necessary. The objective of this preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis was to quantify the effects of rTMS on physical and psychological symptoms in individuals with TBI. We systematically searched six databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rTMS in TBI patients reporting pain and neuropsychiatric outcomes published until March 20, 2022. The mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was estimated separately for outcomes to understand the mean effect size. Twelve RCTs with 276 TBI patients were ultimately selected from 1605 records for systematic review, and 11 of the studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, five of the included studies showed a low risk of bias. The effects of rTMS on neuropathic pain were statistically significant ( $\text{MD}=-1.00$ , 95% CI -1.76 to -0.25, $P=0.009$ ), with high heterogeneity ( $I^2=76\%$ ). A significant advantage of 1 Hz rTMS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in improving depression ( $\text{MD}=-6.52$ , 95% CI -11.58 to -1.46, $P=0.01$ ) was shown, and a significant improvement was noted in the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire-13 (RPQ-13) scores of mild TBI patients after rTMS ( $\text{MD}=-5.87$ , 95% CI -10.63 to -1.11, $P=0.02$ ). However, no significance was found in cognition measurement. No major adverse events related to rTMS were reported. Moderate evidence suggests that rTMS can effectively and safely improve neuropathic pain, while its effectiveness on depression, postconcussion symptoms, and cognition is limited. More trials with a larger number of participants are needed to draw firm conclusions. This trial is registered with PROSPERO (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021242364.

Transcranial direct current stimulation of 3 cortical targets is no more effective than placebo as treatment for fibromyalgia: a double-blind sham-controlled clinical trial

ABSTRACT

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex seem to improve pain and other symptoms of fibromyalgia (FM), although the evidence on the effectiveness of tDCS and the optimal stimulation target is not robust enough. Our main objective was to establish the optimal area of stimulation, comparing the 2 classical targets and a novel pain-related area, the operculo-insular cortex, in a sham-controlled trial. Using a double-blind design, we randomly assigned 130 women with FM to 4 treatment groups (M1, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, operculo-insular cortex, and sham), each receiving fifteen 20-minute sessions of 2 mA anodal tDCS over the left hemisphere. Our primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were the other core symptoms of FM (fatigue, mood, cognitive and sleep disorders, and hyperalgesia measured by the pressure pain threshold). We performed the assessment at 3 time points (before, immediately after treatment, and at 6 months follow-up). The linear mixed-model analysis of variances showed significant treatment effects across time for clinical pain and for fatigue, cognitive and sleep disturbances, and experimental pain, irrespective of the group. In mood, the 3 active tDCS groups showed a significantly larger improvement in anxiety and depression than sham. Our findings provide evidence of a placebo effect, support the use of tDCS for the treatment of affective symptoms, and challenge the effectiveness of tDCS as treatment of FM.

Non-invasive Brain Stimulation for Chronic Pain: State of the Art and Future Directions

As a technique that can guide brain plasticity, non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has the potential to improve the treatment of chronic pain (CP) because it can interfere with ongoing brain neural activity to regulate specific neural networks related to pain management. Treatments of CP with various forms of NIBS, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), using new parameters of stimulation have achieved encouraging results. Evidence of moderate quality indicates that high-frequency rTMS of the primary motor cortex has a clear effect on neuropathic pain (NP) and fibromyalgia. However, evidence on its effectiveness regarding pain relief in other CP conditions is conflicting. Concerning tDCS, evidence of low quality supports its benefit for CP treatment. However, evidence suggesting that it exerts a small treatment effect on NP and headaches is also conflicting. In this paper, we describe the underlying principles behind these commonly used stimulation techniques; and summarize the results of randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Future research should focus on a better evaluation of the short-term and long-term effectiveness of all NIBS techniques and whether they decrease healthcare use, as well as on the refinement of selection criteria.

Cortical stimulation for chronic pain: from anecdote to evidence

Epidural stimulation of the motor cortex (eMCS) was devised in the 1990's, and has now largely supplanted thalamic stimulation for neuropathic pain relief. Its mechanisms of action involve activation of multiple cortico-subcortical areas initiated in the thalamus, with involvement of endogenous opioids and descending inhibition toward the spinal cord. Evidence for clinical efficacy is now supported by at least seven RCTs; benefits may persist up to 10 years, and can be reasonably predicted by preoperative use of non-invasive repetitive magnetic stimulation (rTMS). rTMS first developed as a means of predicting the efficacy of epidural procedures, then as an analgesic method on its own right. Reasonable evidence from at least six well-conducted RCTs favors a significant analgesic effect of high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex in neuropathic pain (NP), and less consistently in widespread/fibromyalgic pain. Stimulation of the dorsolateral frontal cortex (DLPFC) has not proven efficacious for pain, so far. The posterior operculo-insular cortex is a new and attractive target but evidence remains inconsistent. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is applied upon similar targets as rTMS and eMCS; it does not elicit action potentials but modulates the neuronal resting membrane state. tDCS presents practical advantages including low cost, few safety issues, and possibility of home-based protocols; however, the limited quality of most published reports entails a low level of evidence. Patients responsive to tDCS may differ from those improved by rTMS, and in both cases repeated sessions over a long time may be required to achieve clinically significant relief. Both invasive and non-invasive procedures exert their effects through multiple distributed brain networks influencing the sensory, affective and cognitive aspects of chronic pain. Their effects are mainly exerted upon abnormally sensitized pathways, rather than on acute physiological pain. Extending the duration of long-term benefits remains a challenge, for which different strategies are discussed in this review.