1
|
Demarest P, Rustamov N, Swift J, Xie T, Adamek M, Cho H, Wilson E, Han Z, Belsten A, Luczak N, Brunner P, Haroutounian S, Leuthardt EC. A novel theta-controlled vibrotactile brain-computer interface to treat chronic pain: a pilot study. Sci Rep 2024; 14:3433. [PMID: 38341457 PMCID: PMC10858946 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-53261-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Accepted: 01/30/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Limitations in chronic pain therapies necessitate novel interventions that are effective, accessible, and safe. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) provide a promising modality for targeting neuropathology underlying chronic pain by converting recorded neural activity into perceivable outputs. Recent evidence suggests that increased frontal theta power (4-7 Hz) reflects pain relief from chronic and acute pain. Further studies have suggested that vibrotactile stimulation decreases pain intensity in experimental and clinical models. This longitudinal, non-randomized, open-label pilot study's objective was to reinforce frontal theta activity in six patients with chronic upper extremity pain using a novel vibrotactile neurofeedback BCI system. Patients increased their BCI performance, reflecting thought-driven control of neurofeedback, and showed a significant decrease in pain severity (1.29 ± 0.25 MAD, p = 0.03, q = 0.05) and pain interference (1.79 ± 1.10 MAD p = 0.03, q = 0.05) scores without any adverse events. Pain relief significantly correlated with frontal theta modulation. These findings highlight the potential of BCI-mediated cortico-sensory coupling of frontal theta with vibrotactile stimulation for alleviating chronic pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phillip Demarest
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, McKelvey School of Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Nabi Rustamov
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - James Swift
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Tao Xie
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Markus Adamek
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Hohyun Cho
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Elizabeth Wilson
- Division of Clinical and Translational Research, Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Washington University Pain Center, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Zhuangyu Han
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, McKelvey School of Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Alexander Belsten
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Nicholas Luczak
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Peter Brunner
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, McKelvey School of Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St Louis, MO, 63130, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Simon Haroutounian
- Division of Clinical and Translational Research, Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
- Washington University Pain Center, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Eric C Leuthardt
- Division of Neurotechnology, Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, McKelvey School of Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St Louis, MO, 63130, USA.
- Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Woo CG, Kim JH, Lee JH, Kim HJ. Effectiveness of antidepressant repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in a patient with refractory psychogenic dysphagia: A case report and review of literature. World J Clin Cases 2023; 11:6850-6856. [PMID: 37901033 PMCID: PMC10600843 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i28.6850] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Revised: 08/28/2023] [Accepted: 09/04/2023] [Indexed: 09/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dysphagia is a common condition in older as well as young patients, and a variety of treatments have been reported depending on the cause. However, clinicians are challenged when the cause is unclear. This is the case with psychogenic dysphagia, which has typically been treated with supportive psychotherapy, medication, swallowing exercise, and dysphagia rehabilitation therapy. Here, we aimed to relieve the symptoms of a patient with refractory psychogenic dysphagia, who was unresponsive to conventional swallowing therapy, with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). CASE SUMMARY A relatively calm-looking 35-year-old female patient presented with a 2-year history of dysphagia. She showed little improvement with conventional swallowing treatments over the past 2 years. She was relatively compliant with in-hospital dysphagia therapy, but uncooperative with home exercise and medication. In particular, since she was resistant to drug treatment, we had to take a different approach than the treatment she had been receiving for the past 2 years. After much deliberation, we decided to initiate antidepressant rTMS treatment with her consent (IRB No. 2023-05-021). Antidepressant rTMS treatment was performed twice weekly for a total of 20 sessions over 10 wk. The results showed improvement in subjective symptoms and video fluoroscopic swallowing study findings. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of symptomatic improvement using antidepressant rTMS protocol for refractory psychogenic dysphagia. CONCLUSION This case demonstrates that rTMS with antidepressant protocol can be used to improve swallowing in patients with refractory psychogenic dysphagia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang Gok Woo
- Department of Pathology, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju 28644, South Korea
| | - Ji Hyoun Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju 28644, South Korea
| | - Jeong Hwan Lee
- Department of Psychiatry, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju 28644, South Korea
| | - Hyo Jong Kim
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju 28644, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sheng R, Chen C, Chen H, Yu P. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke rehabilitation: insights into the molecular and cellular mechanisms of neuroinflammation. Front Immunol 2023; 14:1197422. [PMID: 37283739 PMCID: PMC10239808 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1197422] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Accepted: 05/10/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Stroke is a leading cause of mortality and disability worldwide, with most survivors reporting dysfunctions of motor, sensation, deglutition, cognition, emotion, and speech, etc. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), one of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, is able to modulate neural excitability of brain regions and has been utilized in neurological and psychiatric diseases. Moreover, a large number of studies have shown that the rTMS presents positive effects on function recovery of stroke patients. In this review, we would like to summarized the clinical benefits of rTMS for stroke rehabilitation, including improvements of motor impairment, dysphagia, depression, cognitive function, and central post-stroke pain. In addition, this review will also discuss the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying rTMS-mediated stroke rehabilitation, especially immune regulatory mechanisms, such as regulation of immune cells and inflammatory cytokines. Moreover, the neuroimaging technique as an important tool in rTMS-mediated stroke rehabilitation has been discussed, to better understanding the mechanisms underlying the effects of rTMS. Finally, the current challenges and future prospects of rTMS-mediated stroke rehabilitation are also elucidated with the intention to accelerate its widespread clinical application.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rongjun Sheng
- Department of Radiology, The First People’s Hospital of Linping District, Hangzhou, China
| | - Changchun Chen
- Department of Radiology, The People’s Hospital of Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture, Guizhou, China
| | - Huan Chen
- Department of Radiology, The People’s Hospital of Longyou, Quzhou, China
| | - Peipei Yu
- Department of Radiology, Sanmen People’s Hospital, Taizhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Anodal-TDCS over Left-DLPFC Modulates Motor Cortex Excitability in Chronic Lower Back Pain. Brain Sci 2022; 12:brainsci12121654. [PMID: 36552115 PMCID: PMC9776085 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12121654] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2022] [Revised: 11/22/2022] [Accepted: 11/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Chronic pain is associated with abnormal cortical excitability and increased pain intensity. Research investigating the potential for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate motor cortex excitability and reduce pain in individuals with chronic lower back pain (CLBP) yield mixed results. The present randomised, placebo-controlled study examined the impact of anodal-tDCS over left-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (left-DLPFC) on motor cortex excitability and pain in those with CLBP. Nineteen participants with CLBP (Mage = 53.16 years, SDage = 14.80 years) received 20-min of sham or anodal tDCS, twice weekly, for 4 weeks. Short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF) were assessed using paired-pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation prior to and immediately following the tDCS intervention. Linear Mixed Models revealed no significant effect of tDCS group or time, on SICI or ICF. The interactions between tDCS group and time on SICI and ICF only approached significance. Bayesian analyses revealed the anodal-tDCS group demonstrated higher ICF and SICI following the intervention compared to the sham-tDCS group. The anodal-tDCS group also demonstrated a reduction in pain intensity and self-reported disability compared to the sham-tDCS group. These findings provide preliminary support for anodal-tDCS over left-DLPFC to modulate cortical excitability and reduce pain in CLBP.
Collapse
|
5
|
Evers S. Non-Invasive Neurostimulation Methods for Acute and Preventive Migraine Treatment-A Narrative Review. J Clin Med 2021; 10:3302. [PMID: 34362086 PMCID: PMC8347785 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10153302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2021] [Revised: 07/18/2021] [Accepted: 07/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefan Evers
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Münster, 48153 Münster, Germany;
- Department of Neurology, Lindenbrunn Hospital, 31863 Coppenbrügge, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Leung A, Shirvalkar P, Chen R, Kuluva J, Vaninetti M, Bermudes R, Poree L, Wassermann EM, Kopell B, Levy R. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Pain, Headache, and Comorbid Depression: INS-NANS Expert Consensus Panel Review and Recommendation. Neuromodulation 2020; 23:267-290. [PMID: 32212288 DOI: 10.1111/ner.13094] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2019] [Revised: 10/27/2019] [Accepted: 11/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Albert Leung
- Professor of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Center for Pain Medicine, University of California, San Diego, School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA.,Director, Center for Pain and Headache Research, VA San Diego Healthcare System, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Prasad Shirvalkar
- Assistant Professor, Departments of Anesthesiology (Pain Management), Neurology, and Neurosurgery, UCSF School of Medicine, USA
| | - Robert Chen
- Catherine Manson Chair in Movement Disorders, Professor of Medicine (Neurology), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Joshua Kuluva
- Neurologist and Psychiatrist, TMS Health Solution, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Michael Vaninetti
- Assistant Clinical Professor, Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, UCSD School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Richard Bermudes
- Chief Medical Officer, TMS Health Solutions, Assistant Clinical Professor- Volunteer, Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Lawrence Poree
- Professor of Anesthesiology, Director, Neuromodulation Service, Division of Pain Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Eric M Wassermann
- Director, Behavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Brian Kopell
- Professor of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Center for Neuromodulation, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert Levy
- President of International Neuromodulation Society, Editor-in-Chief, Neuromodulation, Boca Raton, FL, USA
| | -
- See Appendix for Complete List of Task Group Members
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Yang S, Chang MC. Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Pain Management: A Systematic Narrative Review. Front Neurol 2020; 11:114. [PMID: 32132973 PMCID: PMC7040236 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2019] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Recently, clinicians have been using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating various pain conditions. This systematic narrative review aimed to examine the use and efficacy of rTMS for controlling various pain conditions. A PubMed search was conducted for articles that were published until June 7, 2019 and used rTMS for pain alleviation. The key search phrase for identifying potentially relevant articles was (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation AND pain). The following inclusion criteria were applied for article selection: (1) patients with pain, (2) rTMS was applied for pain management, and (3) follow-up evaluations were performed after rTMS stimulation to assess the reduction in pain. Review articles were excluded. Overall, 1,030 potentially relevant articles were identified. After reading the titles and abstracts and assessing eligibility based on the full-text articles, 106 publications were finally included in our analysis. Overall, our findings suggested that rTMS is beneficial for treating neuropathic pain of various origins, such as central pain, pain from peripheral nerve disorders, fibromyalgia, and migraine. Although data on the use of rTMS for orofacial pain, including trigeminal neuralgia, phantom pain, low back pain, myofascial pain syndrome, pelvic pain, and complex regional pain syndrome, were promising, there was insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of rTMS for treating these conditions. Therefore, further studies are needed to validate the effects of rTMS on pain relief in these conditions. Overall, this review will help guide clinicians in making informed decisions regarding whether rTMS is an appropriate option for managing various pain conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seoyon Yang
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Ewha Woman's University Seoul Hospital, Ewha Woman's University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Min Cheol Chang
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University, Daegu, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Fitzgerald PB, Hoy KE, Anderson RJ, Daskalakis ZJ. A STUDY OF THE PATTERN OF RESPONSE TO rTMS TREATMENT IN DEPRESSION. Depress Anxiety 2016; 33:746-53. [PMID: 27059158 DOI: 10.1002/da.22503] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2015] [Revised: 03/08/2016] [Accepted: 03/13/2016] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Considerable research has demonstrated the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) treatment in patients with depression. However, limited research has described the pattern of response to rTMS treatment or explored possible predictors of the likelihood of treatment response. METHODS Data from 11 clinical trials (n = 1,132) was pooled and we described the pattern of response to rTMS, rate of response, and remission as well as potential clinical and demographic predictors of response. RESULTS There was a bimodal pattern of response to rTMS with the response-associated peak at 57% reduction in depression rating scale scores. About 46% of patients achieved response criteria, with 31% completing rTMS treatment in remission. A greater likelihood of response was seen for patients who had less severe depression at baseline, a shorter duration of the current episode, and recurrent rather than single episode of depression. Greater response was also seen in patients treated at higher stimulation intensity. CONCLUSIONS A meaningful percentage (>40%) of patients respond to a course of rTMS treatment. Response does vary with a number of clinical and demographic variables but none of these variables exert a sufficiently strong influence on response rates to warrant using these criteria to exclude patients from treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul B Fitzgerald
- MonashAlfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University, Central Clinical School, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Kate E Hoy
- MonashAlfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University, Central Clinical School, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rodney J Anderson
- MonashAlfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University, Central Clinical School, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Zafiris J Daskalakis
- Temerty Centre for Therapeutic Brain Intervention and the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Fitzgerald PB, Hoy KE, Elliot D, McQueen S, Wambeek LE, Daskalakis ZJ. A negative double-blind controlled trial of sequential bilateral rTMS in the treatment of bipolar depression. J Affect Disord 2016; 198:158-62. [PMID: 27016659 DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.03.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2015] [Revised: 02/22/2016] [Accepted: 03/11/2016] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE To explore the therapeutic benefit of sequential bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of bipolar depression. METHOD A 2 arm randomized controlled parallel design trial comparing the use of active sequential bilateral rTMS to a sham form of stimulation in 49 patients with bipolar disorder and treatment resistant depression. RESULTS There was no significant difference in mean reduction in depression rating scale scores or response rates between active and sham stimulation. LIMITATIONS The study was of limited sample size and the use of bilateral rTMS limited generalizability to other forms of rTMS. CONCLUSIONS This study provides no support to the use of active sequential bilateral rTMS in the treatment of the depressive phase of bipolar affective disorder. Although this result is not definitive, we suggest that future research may be better focused on trials evaluating the use of unilateral types of rTMS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul B Fitzgerald
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University Central Clinical School, St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
| | - Kate E Hoy
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University Central Clinical School, St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | - David Elliot
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University Central Clinical School, St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | - Susan McQueen
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University Central Clinical School, St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | - Lenore E Wambeek
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University Central Clinical School, St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | - Zafiris J Daskalakis
- Temerty Centre for Therapeutic Brain Intervention and the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Caddy C, Amit BH, McCloud TL, Rendell JM, Furukawa TA, McShane R, Hawton K, Cipriani A. Ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators for depression in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD011612. [PMID: 26395901 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011612.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 84] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Considering the ample evidence of involvement of the glutamate system in the pathophysiology of depression, pre-clinical and clinical studies have been conducted to assess the antidepressant efficacy of glutamate inhibition, and glutamate receptor modulators in particular. This review focuses on the use of glutamate receptor modulators in unipolar depression. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects - and review the acceptability - of ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators in comparison to placebo (or saline placebo), other pharmacologically active agents, or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in alleviating the acute symptoms of depression in people with unipolar major depressive disorder. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR, to 9 January 2015). This register includes relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from: the Cochrane Library (all years), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date). We did not apply any restrictions to date, language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA Double- or single-blind RCTs comparing ketamine, memantine, or other glutamate receptor modulators with placebo (or saline placebo), other active psychotropic drugs, or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in adults with unipolar major depression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Three review authors independently identified studies, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes for this review were response rate and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS We included 25 studies (1242 participants) on ketamine (9 trials), memantine (3), AZD6765 (3), D-cycloserine (2), Org26576 (2), atomoxetine (1), CP-101,606 (1), MK-0657 (1), N-acetylcysteine (1), riluzole (1) and sarcosine (1). Twenty-one studies were placebo-controlled and the majority were two-arm studies (23 out of 25). Twenty-two studies defined an inclusion criteria specifying the severity of depression; 11 specified at least moderate depression; eight, severe depression; and the remaining three, mild-moderate depression. Nine studies recruited only treatment-resistant patients.We rated the risk of bias as low or unclear for most domains, though lack of detail regarding masking of treatment in the studies reduced our certainty in the effect for all outcomes. We rated three studies as having high risk for selective outcome reporting. Many trials did not provide information on all the prespecified outcomes and we found no data, or very limited data, on very important issues like suicidality, cognition, quality of life, costs to healthcare services and dropouts due to lack of efficacy.Among all glutamate receptor modulators, only ketamine (administered intravenously) proved to be more efficacious than placebo, though the quality of evidence was limited by risk of bias and small sample sizes. There was low quality evidence that treatment with ketamine increased the likelihood of response after 24 hours (odds ratio (OR) 10.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.00 to 58.00; 3 RCTs, 56 participants), 72 hours (OR 12.59, 95% CI 2.38 to 66.73; 3 RCTs, 56 participants), and one week (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 6.16; 4 RCTs, 131 participants). The effect of ketamine was even less certain at two weeks, as data were available from only one trial (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.83; 51 participants, low quality evidence). This was consistent across all efficacy outcomes. Ketamine caused more confusion and emotional blunting compared to placebo. There was insufficient evidence to determine if this increased the likelihood of leaving the study early (OR 1.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 8.47; 5 RCTs, 139 participants, low quality evidence).One RCT with 72 participants reported higher numbers of responders on ketamine than midazolam at 24 hours (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.58), 72 hours (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.59), and one week (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.49). However, midazolam was better tolerated than ketamine in terms of blurred vision, dizziness, general malaise and nausea/vomiting at 24 hours post-infusion. The evidence contributing to these outcomes was of low quality.We found better efficacy of sarcosine over citalopram at four weeks (OR 6.93, 95% CI 1.53 to 31.38; 1 study, 40 participants), but not at two weeks (OR: 8.14, 95% CI 0.88 to 75.48); fewer participants in the sarcosine group experienced adverse events (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.68; P = 0.03, 1 study, 40 participants). This was based on low quality evidence. No significant results were found for the remaining glutamate receptor modulators.In one study with 18 participants, ketamine was more effective than ECT at 24 hours (OR 28.00, 95% CI 2.07 to 379.25) and 72 hours (OR 12.25, 95% CI 1.33 to 113.06), but not at one week (OR 3.35, 95% CI 0.12 to 93.83), or two weeks (OR 3.35, 95% CI 0.12 to 93.83). No differences in terms of adverse events were found between ketamine and ECT, however the only adverse events reported were blood pressure and heart rate. This study was rated as very low quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found limited evidence for ketamine's efficacy over placebo at time points up to one week in terms of the primary outcome, response rate. The effects were less certain at two weeks post-treatment. No significant results were found for the remaining ten glutamate receptor modulators, except for sarcosine being more effective than citalopram at four weeks. In terms of adverse events, the only significant differences in favour of placebo over ketamine were in regards to confusion and emotional blunting. Despite the promising nature of these preliminary results, our confidence in the evidence was limited by risk of bias and the small number of participants. Many trials did not provide information on all the prespecified outcomes and we found no data, or very limited data, on very important issues like suicidality, cognition, quality of life, costs to healthcare services and dropouts due to lack of efficacy.All included studies administered ketamine intravenously, which can pose practical problems in clinical practice. Very few trials were included in the meta-analyses for each comparison; the majority of comparisons contained only one study. Further RCTs (with adequate blinding) are needed to explore different modes of administration of ketamine with longer follow-up, which test the comparative efficacy of ketamine and the efficacy of repeated administrations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Caddy
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK, OX3 7JX
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Koski L, Kolivakis T, Yu C, Chen JK, Delaney S, Ptito A. Noninvasive brain stimulation for persistent postconcussion symptoms in mild traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2015; 32:38-44. [PMID: 24955920 DOI: 10.1089/neu.2014.3449] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is typically followed by various postconcussive symptoms (PCS), including headache, depression, and cognitive deficits. In 15-25% of cases, PCS persists beyond the usual 3-month recovery period, interfering with activities of daily living and responding poorly to pharmacotherapy. We tested the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for alleviating PCS. Fifteen eligible patients with mTBI and PCS > 3 months postinjury consented to 20 sessions of rTMS (20 × 5-sec trains; 10 Hz at 110% threshold), with clinical and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) assessments before and after intervention and clinical assessment at 3-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were tolerability, safety, and efficacy, as measured with the PCS Scale. Secondary outcomes included the Cognitive Symptoms Questionnaire, neuropsychological test performance, and working memory task-associated activity as assessed with fMRI. Twelve patients completed all sessions. Three withdrew because of worsening symptoms or for an unrelated event. Stimulation intensity was increased gradually across sessions, and all subjects tolerated the protocol by the sixth session. Commonly reported side effects among completers were increased headache (n = 3) and greater sleep disturbance (n = 3). Participants also reported positive outcomes such as less sleep disturbance (n = 3), and better mental focus (n = 3). On average, PCS scores declined by 14.6 points (p = 0.009) and fMRI task-related activation peaks in the DLPFC increased after rTMS. rTMS is safe, tolerated by most patients with mTBI, and associated with both a reduction in severity of PCS and an increase in task-related activations in DLPFC. Assessment of this intervention in a randomized, control trial is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Koski
- 1 Department of Psychology, McGill University Health Center (MUHC), Department of Neurology/Neurosurgery and Department of Psychology, McGill University, and Mental Illness and Addiction Axis, Research Institute of the MUHC, McGill University , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
McComas AJ, Upton ARM. Cortical spreading depression in migraine-time to reconsider? ARQUIVOS DE NEURO-PSIQUIATRIA 2015. [DOI: 10.1590/0004-282x20150094] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
New evidence concerning the pathophysiology of migraine has come from the results of therapeutic transcranial magnetic stimulation (tTMS). The instantaneous responses to single pulses applied during the aura or headache phase, together with a number of other observations, make it unlikely that cortical spreading depression is involved in migraine. tTMS is considered to act by abolishing abnormal impulse activity in cortical pyramidal neurons and a suggestion is made as to how this activity could arise.
Collapse
|
13
|
Durmaz O, Ateş MA, Şenol MG. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS)-Induced Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgia. Noro Psikiyatr Ars 2015; 52:309-311. [PMID: 28360729 DOI: 10.5152/npa.2015.7618] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2014] [Accepted: 07/29/2014] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an effective and novel treatment method that has been approved for the treatment of refractory depression by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The most common side effects of rTMS are a transient headache that usually responds to simple analgesics, local discomfort in the stimulation area, dizziness, ipsilateral lacrimation and, very rarely, generalized seizure. TMS is also regarded as a beneficial tool for investigating mechanisms underlying headache. Although rTMS has considerable benefits in terms of headache, there is the potential for rare side effects. In this report, we present the case of a patient with no history of autonomic headache who underwent a course of rTMS for refractory unipolar depression caused by an inadequate response to pharmacotherapy. After his fourth rTMS session, the patient developed sudden headaches with characteristics of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia on the stimulated side, representing a noteworthy example of the potential side effects of rTMS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Onur Durmaz
- Clinic of Psychiatry, Van Military Hospital, Van, Turkey
| | - Mehmet Alpay Ateş
- Department of Psychiatry, Gülhane Military Medical Academy Haydarpaşa Training Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Mehmet Güney Şenol
- Department of Neurology, Gülhane Military Medical Academy Haydarpaşa Training Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Kreuzer PM, Schecklmann M, Lehner A, Wetter TC, Poeppl TB, Rupprecht R, de Ridder D, Landgrebe M, Langguth B. The ACDC pilot trial: targeting the anterior cingulate by double cone coil rTMS for the treatment of depression. Brain Stimul 2014; 8:240-6. [PMID: 25541389 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2014.11.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2014] [Revised: 11/24/2014] [Accepted: 11/24/2014] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the dorsolateral-prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) with conventional figure-of-8 (=butterfly) coils has been used as an antidepressant therapeutic tool for almost twenty years. Very recently, an innovative rTMS coil, the so-called double cone coil (DC), was introduced allowing the modulation of the anterior cingulate cortex (AC). We investigated safety and therapeutic effectiveness of this stimulation in a naturalistic clinical setting. METHOD Forty-five patients suffering a moderate to severe depressive episode were randomized to receive 15 sessions of either conventional rTMS of the left DLPFC ("butterfly-rTMS"; 10 Hz; 2000 stimuli/day, RMT 110%), mediofrontal double cone coil stimulation of the anterior cingulate cortex ("ACDC-rTMS" with equal parameters), or sham-stimulation. The primary outcome was the change in the 21-items Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary outcome measures were changes over the course of the trial regarding the HAMD, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scales. RESULTS There was a significant group × time interaction effect regarding the primary outcome (F = 3.269; df = 2,37; P = 0.049). Post-hoc t-testing revealed a significant effect for the comparison ACDC vs. butterfly at week 3/end of treatment (T = 2.646; df = 26; P = 0.014). No severe adverse events occurred during the study. ACDC-stimulation was well tolerated by the majority of patients similar like butterfly-rTMS and sham-stimulation. CONCLUSION This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of ACDC-rTMS-stimulation as an add-on-treatment for depression. Its clinical effects warrant further investigation in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter M Kreuzer
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Martin Schecklmann
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany
| | - Astrid Lehner
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany
| | - Thomas C Wetter
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany
| | - Timm B Poeppl
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany
| | - Rainer Rupprecht
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany
| | - Dirk de Ridder
- Unit of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgical Sciences, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; Brain Research Center Antwerp for Innovative & Interdisciplinary Neuromodulation, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, Belgium
| | - Michael Landgrebe
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany; Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Kbo-Lech-Mangfall-Klinik Agatharied, Germany
| | - Berthold Langguth
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Lefaucheur JP, André-Obadia N, Antal A, Ayache SS, Baeken C, Benninger DH, Cantello RM, Cincotta M, de Carvalho M, De Ridder D, Devanne H, Di Lazzaro V, Filipović SR, Hummel FC, Jääskeläinen SK, Kimiskidis VK, Koch G, Langguth B, Nyffeler T, Oliviero A, Padberg F, Poulet E, Rossi S, Rossini PM, Rothwell JC, Schönfeldt-Lecuona C, Siebner HR, Slotema CW, Stagg CJ, Valls-Sole J, Ziemann U, Paulus W, Garcia-Larrea L. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin Neurophysiol 2014; 125:2150-2206. [PMID: 25034472 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2014.05.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1287] [Impact Index Per Article: 128.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2014] [Revised: 05/09/2014] [Accepted: 05/13/2014] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
A group of European experts was commissioned to establish guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) from evidence published up until March 2014, regarding pain, movement disorders, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, tinnitus, depression, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, craving/addiction, and conversion. Despite unavoidable inhomogeneities, there is a sufficient body of evidence to accept with level A (definite efficacy) the analgesic effect of high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the pain and the antidepressant effect of HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). A Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for the antidepressant effect of low-frequency (LF) rTMS of the right DLPFC, HF-rTMS of the left DLPFC for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, and LF-rTMS of contralesional M1 in chronic motor stroke. The effects of rTMS in a number of indications reach level C (possible efficacy), including LF-rTMS of the left temporoparietal cortex in tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. It remains to determine how to optimize rTMS protocols and techniques to give them relevance in routine clinical practice. In addition, professionals carrying out rTMS protocols should undergo rigorous training to ensure the quality of the technical realization, guarantee the proper care of patients, and maximize the chances of success. Under these conditions, the therapeutic use of rTMS should be able to develop in the coming years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Pascal Lefaucheur
- Department of Physiology, Henri Mondor Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Créteil, France; EA 4391, Nerve Excitability and Therapeutic Team, Faculty of Medicine, Paris Est Créteil University, Créteil, France.
| | - Nathalie André-Obadia
- Neurophysiology and Epilepsy Unit, Pierre Wertheimer Neurological Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Bron, France; Inserm U 1028, NeuroPain Team, Neuroscience Research Center of Lyon (CRNL), Lyon-1 University, Bron, France
| | - Andrea Antal
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Samar S Ayache
- Department of Physiology, Henri Mondor Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Créteil, France; EA 4391, Nerve Excitability and Therapeutic Team, Faculty of Medicine, Paris Est Créteil University, Créteil, France
| | - Chris Baeken
- Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Ghent Experimental Psychiatry (GHEP) Lab, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Psychiatry, University Hospital (UZBrussel), Brussels, Belgium
| | - David H Benninger
- Neurology Service, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Roberto M Cantello
- Department of Translational Medicine, Section of Neurology, University of Piemonte Orientale "A. Avogadro", Novara, Italy
| | | | - Mamede de Carvalho
- Institute of Physiology, Institute of Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Dirk De Ridder
- Brai(2)n, Tinnitus Research Initiative Clinic Antwerp, Belgium; Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Hervé Devanne
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France; ULCO, Lille-Nord de France University, Lille, France
| | - Vincenzo Di Lazzaro
- Department of Neurosciences, Institute of Neurology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Rome, Italy
| | - Saša R Filipović
- Department of Neurophysiology, Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Beograd, Serbia
| | - Friedhelm C Hummel
- Brain Imaging and Neurostimulation (BINS) Laboratory, Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Satu K Jääskeläinen
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Turku University Hospital, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
| | - Vasilios K Kimiskidis
- Laboratory of Clinical Neurophysiology, AHEPA Hospital, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Giacomo Koch
- Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Unit, Neurologia Clinica e Comportamentale, Fondazione Santa Lucia IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Berthold Langguth
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - Thomas Nyffeler
- Perception and Eye Movement Laboratory, Department of Neurology, University Hospital, Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Antonio Oliviero
- FENNSI Group, Hospital Nacional de Parapléjicos, SESCAM, Toledo, Spain
| | - Frank Padberg
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
| | - Emmanuel Poulet
- Department of Emergency Psychiatry, CHU Lyon, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France; EAM 4615, Lyon-1 University, Bron, France
| | - Simone Rossi
- Brain Investigation & Neuromodulation Lab, Unit of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy
| | - Paolo Maria Rossini
- Brain Connectivity Laboratory, IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, Rome, Italy; Institute of Neurology, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - John C Rothwell
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Hartwig R Siebner
- Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark; Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark
| | | | - Charlotte J Stagg
- Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Josep Valls-Sole
- EMG Unit, Neurology Service, Hospital Clinic, Department of Medicine, University of Barcelona, August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ulf Ziemann
- Department of Neurology & Stroke, and Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Walter Paulus
- Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Luis Garcia-Larrea
- Inserm U 1028, NeuroPain Team, Neuroscience Research Center of Lyon (CRNL), Lyon-1 University, Bron, France; Pain Unit, Pierre Wertheimer Neurological Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Bron, France
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Li CT, Su TP, Hsieh JC, Ho ST. Efficacy and practical issues of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on chronic medically unexplained symptoms of pain. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2013; 51:81-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.aat.2013.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2013] [Revised: 04/01/2013] [Accepted: 04/08/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
17
|
Abstract
Invasive stimulation of the motor (precentral) cortex using surgically implanted epidural electrodes is indicated for the treatment of neuropathic pain that is refractory to medical treatment. Controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of epidural motor cortex stimulation (MCS), but MCS outcome remains variable and validated criteria for selecting good candidates for implantation are lacking. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive approach that could be used as a preoperative tool to predict MCS outcome and also could serve as a therapeutic procedure in itself to treat pain disorders. This requires repeated rTMS sessions and a maintenance protocol. Other studies have also demonstrated the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in relieving chronic pain syndromes. The most studied target is the precentral cortex, but other targets, such as the prefrontal and parietal cortices, could be of interest. The analgesic effects of cortical stimulation relate to the activation of various circuits modulating neural activities in remote structures, such as the thalamus, limbic cortex, insula, or descending inhibitory controls. In addition to the treatment of refractory neuropathic pain by epidural MCS, new developments of this type of strategy are ongoing, for other types of pain syndrome and stimulation techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Pascal Lefaucheur
- Faculty of Medicine, Université Paris Est Créteil and Service de Physiologie, Explorations Fonctionnelles, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Mennemeier M, Munn T, Allensworth M, Lenow JK, Brown G, Allen S, Dornhoffer J, Williams DK. Laterality, frequency and replication of rTMS treatment for chronic tinnitus: pilot studies and a review of maintenance treatment. Hear Res 2013; 295:30-7. [PMID: 22486989 PMCID: PMC3538962 DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.03.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2011] [Revised: 03/15/2012] [Accepted: 03/21/2012] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
This manuscript reports on findings of three open-label, pilot studies and it reviews studies using rTMS as a maintenance treatment for any disorder. The first pilot study examined whether a patient's original treatment response to 1 Hz rTMS over temporal cortex could be replicated by stimulating a homologous region of the opposite hemisphere. The second study examined whether a patient's response to 1 Hz rTMS could be replicated by applying 10 Hz rTMS over the same treatment site. The third study applied a 3-day course of maintenance rTMS, either at 1 or 10 Hz, when subjects indicated that the benefit of their last course of treatment was waning. Patients with bilateral subjective tinnitus of at least 6 months duration were recruited from a prior, sham controlled study with treatment crossover that applied 1 Hz rTMS over temporal cortex. Both treatment responders and non-responders were recruited. Results indicated, first, that the original treatment response, both positive and negative, is replicated after stimulating a homologous region of the opposite hemisphere; second, patients respond similarly to 1 and 10 Hz stimulation of the same treatment site (an exception was one patient who initially failed 1 Hz stimulation but responded positively to 10 Hz stimulation); and, third, maintenance rTMS had a sustained and additive benefit for tinnitus among treatment responders. Conclusions are that rTMS-induced effects on tinnitus are neither hemisphere specific nor frequency dependent; although, different frequencies of rTMS may have greater potency for a given subject. Maintenance treatment is a well tolerated approach with demonstrated feasibility for managing chronic tinnitus in persons who respond positively to an initial course of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Mennemeier
- Department of Neurobiology and Developmental Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W. Markham St., Slot #826, Little Rock, AR 72205-7199, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Fitzgerald PB, Hoy KE, Herring SE, McQueen S, Peachey AVJ, Segrave RA, Maller J, Hall P, Daskalakis ZJ. A double blind randomized trial of unilateral left and bilateral prefrontal cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation in treatment resistant major depression. J Affect Disord 2012; 139:193-8. [PMID: 22397890 DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.02.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2011] [Revised: 02/07/2012] [Accepted: 02/08/2012] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE A substantive body of research has demonstrated the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment (rTMS) in patients with depression. However, the parameters needed to optimize therapeutic efficacy remain unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is an advantage in efficacy of sequential bilateral rTMS compared to standard high-frequency left sided rTMS. METHOD Sixty seven patients with treatment resistant depression were included in a randomised double-blind sham controlled trial of sequential bilateral rTMS compared to standard high-frequency left sided rTMS and sham rTMS over a three-week period. The study also included a further three week comparison of the two active treatment conditions. The primary outcome variable was scores on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). RESULTS In the three-week double-blind phase of the trial there was a greater antidepressant response to unilateral left sided rTMS compared with sham or bilateral rTMS. Across the full six weeks of active rTMS, there was also a consistent pattern of improved response in unilateral left compared to bilateral treatment. Response rates were low in both active groups. CONCLUSIONS This study does not support the hypothesis that sequential bilateral rTMS is more effective than unilateral high-frequency left-sided rTMS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul B Fitzgerald
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University Central Clinical School, Commercial Rd, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Advanced Pharmaco-EEG Reveals Morphine Induced Changes in the Brain's Pain Network. J Clin Neurophysiol 2012; 29:219-25. [DOI: 10.1097/wnp.0b013e3182570fd3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
|
21
|
Brain activity in rectosigmoid pain: Unravelling conditioning pain modulatory pathways. Clin Neurophysiol 2012; 123:829-37. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2011.07.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2011] [Revised: 07/08/2011] [Accepted: 07/09/2011] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
22
|
Lefaucheur JP, André-Obadia N, Poulet E, Devanne H, Haffen E, Londero A, Cretin B, Leroi AM, Radtchenko A, Saba G, Thai-Van H, Litré CF, Vercueil L, Bouhassira D, Ayache SS, Farhat WH, Zouari HG, Mylius V, Nicolier M, Garcia-Larrea L. [French guidelines on the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): safety and therapeutic indications]. Neurophysiol Clin 2011; 41:221-95. [PMID: 22153574 DOI: 10.1016/j.neucli.2011.10.062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 91] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2011] [Accepted: 10/18/2011] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
During the past decade, a large amount of work on transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been performed, including the development of new paradigms of stimulation, the integration of imaging data, and the coupling of TMS techniques with electroencephalography or neuroimaging. These accumulating data being difficult to synthesize, several French scientific societies commissioned a group of experts to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on TMS. This text contains all the consensual findings of the expert group on the mechanisms of action, safety rules and indications of TMS, including repetitive TMS (rTMS). TMS sessions have been conducted in thousands of healthy subjects or patients with various neurological or psychiatric diseases, allowing a better assessment of risks associated with this technique. The number of reported side effects is extremely low, the most serious complication being the occurrence of seizures. In most reported seizures, the stimulation parameters did not follow the previously published recommendations (Wassermann, 1998) [430] and rTMS was associated to medication that could lower the seizure threshold. Recommendations on the safe use of TMS / rTMS were recently updated (Rossi et al., 2009) [348], establishing new limits for stimulation parameters and fixing the contraindications. The recommendations we propose regarding safety are largely based on this previous report with some modifications. By contrast, the issue of therapeutic indications of rTMS has never been addressed before, the present work being the first attempt of a synthesis and expert consensus on this topic. The use of TMS/rTMS is discussed in the context of chronic pain, movement disorders, stroke, epilepsy, tinnitus and psychiatric disorders. There is already a sufficient level of evidence of published data to retain a therapeutic indication of rTMS in clinical practice (grade A) in chronic neuropathic pain, major depressive episodes, and auditory hallucinations. The number of therapeutic indications of rTMS is expected to increase in coming years, in parallel with the optimisation of stimulation parameters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J-P Lefaucheur
- EA 4391, faculté de médecine, université Paris-Est-Créteil, 51, avenue du Maréchal-de-Lattre-de-Tassigny, 94010 Créteil, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Muller PA, Pascual-Leone A, Rotenberg A. Safety and tolerability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with pathologic positive sensory phenomena: a review of literature. Brain Stimul 2011; 5:320-329.e27. [PMID: 22322098 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2011.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2011] [Revised: 04/11/2011] [Accepted: 04/12/2011] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is emerging as a valuable therapeutic and diagnostic tool. rTMS appears particularly promising for disorders characterized by positive sensory phenomena that are attributable to alterations in sensory cortical excitability. Among these are tinnitus, auditory and visual hallucinations, and pain syndromes. OBJECTIVE Despite studies addressing rTMS efficacy in suppression of positive sensory symptoms, the safety of stimulation of potentially hyperexcitable cortex has not been fully addressed. We performed a systematic literature review and metaanalysis to describe the rTMS safety profile in these disorders. METHODS Using the PubMed database, we performed an English-language literature search from January 1985 to April 2011 to review all pertinent publications. Per study, we noted and listed pertinent details. From these data we also calculated a crude per-subject risk for each adverse event. RESULTS One hundred six publications (n = 1815) were identified with patients undergoing rTMS for pathologic positive sensory phenomena. Adverse events associated with rTMS were generally mild and occurred in 16.7% of subjects. Seizure was the most serious adverse event, and occurred in three patients with a 0.16% crude per-subject risk. The second most severe adverse event involved aggravation of sensory phenomena, occurring in 1.54%. CONCLUSIONS The published data suggest rTMS for the treatment or diagnosis of pathologic positive sensory phenomena appears to be a relatively safe and well-tolerated procedure. However, published data are lacking in systematic reporting of adverse events, and safety risks of rTMS in these patient populations will have to be addressed in future prospective trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul A Muller
- Department of Neurology, Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Institut Guttmann de Neurorehabilitació, Universitat Autónoma, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Alexander Rotenberg
- Department of Neurology, Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Brighina F, De Tommaso M, Giglia F, Scalia S, Cosentino G, Puma A, Panetta M, Giglia G, Fierro B. Modulation of pain perception by transcranial magnetic stimulation of left prefrontal cortex. J Headache Pain 2011; 12:185-91. [PMID: 21350791 PMCID: PMC3072504 DOI: 10.1007/s10194-011-0322-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 91] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2010] [Accepted: 11/30/2010] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Evidence by functional imaging studies suggests the role of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in the inhibitory control of nociceptive transmission system. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is able to modulate pain response to capsaicin. In the present study, we evaluated the effect of DLPFC activation (through rTMS) on nociceptive control in a model of capsaicin-induced pain. The study was performed on healthy subjects that underwent capsaicin application on right or left hand. Subjects judged the pain induced by capsaicin through a 0–100 VAS scale before and after 5 Hz rTMS over left and right DLPFC at 10 or 20 min after capsaicin application in two separate groups (8 subjects each). Left DLPFC-rTMS delivered either at 10 and 20 min after capsaicin application significantly decreased spontaneous pain in both hands. Right DLPFC rTMS showed no significant effect on pain measures. According to these results, stimulation of left DLPFC seems able to exert a bilateral control on pain system, supporting the critical antinociceptive role of such area. This could open new perspectives to non-invasive brain stimulation protocols of alternative target area for pain treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filippo Brighina
- Dip di Biomedicine Sperimentali e Neuroscienze Cliniche (BioNeC), University of Palermo, Via G. La Loggia, 1, 90129 Palermo, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
de Tommaso M, Brighina F, Fierro B, Francesco VD, Santostasi R, Sciruicchio V, Vecchio E, Serpino C, Lamberti P, Livrea P. Effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of primary motor cortex on laser-evoked potentials in migraine. J Headache Pain 2010; 11:505-12. [PMID: 20714776 PMCID: PMC3476225 DOI: 10.1007/s10194-010-0247-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2010] [Accepted: 07/27/2010] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of high-frequency (HF) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the left primary motor cortex (M1) on subjective pain and evoked responses induced by laser stimulation (LEPs) of the contralateral hand and supraorbital zone in a cohort of migraine patients without aura during the inter-critical phase, and to compare the effects with those of non-migraine healthy controls. Thirteen migraine patients and 12 sex- and age-matched controls were evaluated. Each rTMS session consisted of 1,800 stimuli at a frequency of 5 Hz and 90% motor threshold intensity. Sham (control) rTMS was performed at the same stimulation position. The vertex LEP amplitude was reduced at the trigeminal and hand levels in the sham-placebo condition and after rTMS to a greater extent in the migraine patients than in healthy controls, while the laser pain rating was unaffected. These results suggest that HF rTMS of motor cortex and the sham procedure can both modulate pain-related evoked responses in migraine patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marina de Tommaso
- Neurophysiopathology of Pain Unit, Neurological and Psychiatric Sciences Department, Neurological Clinic, Policlinico, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Pompili M, Serafini G, Di Cosimo D, Dominici G, Innamorati M, Lester D, Forte A, Girardi N, De Filippis S, Tatarelli R, Martelletti P. Psychiatric comorbidity and suicide risk in patients with chronic migraine. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2010; 6:81-91. [PMID: 20396640 PMCID: PMC2854084 DOI: 10.2147/ndt.s8467] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2010] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore the impact of mental illness among patients with migraine. We performed MedLine and PsycINFO searches from 1980 to 2008. Research has systematically documented a strong bidirectional association between migraine and psychiatric disorders. The relationship between migraine and psychopathology has often been clinically discussed rather than systematically studied. Future research should include sound methodologically-based studies focusing on the interplay of factors behind the relationship between migraine, suicide risk, and mental illness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurizio Pompili
- Department of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Sensory Functions, Suicide Prevention Center, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) during capsaicin-induced pain: modulatory effects on motor cortex excitability. Exp Brain Res 2010; 203:31-8. [PMID: 20232062 DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2206-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 109] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2009] [Accepted: 02/21/2010] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Evidence by functional imaging studies suggests the role of left DLPFC in the inhibitory control of nociceptive transmission system. Pain exerts an inhibitory modulation on motor cortex, reducing MEP amplitude, while the effect of pain on motor intracortical excitability has not been studied so far. In the present study, we explored in healthy subjects the effect of capsaicin-induced pain and the modulatory influences of left DLPFC stimulation on motor corticospinal and intracortical excitability. Capsaicin was applied on the dorsal surface of the right hand, and measures of motor corticospinal excitability (test-MEP) and short intracortical inhibition (SICI) and facilitation (ICF) were obtained by paired-pulse TMS on left motor cortex. Evaluations were made before and at different times after capsaicin application in two separate sessions: without and with high-frequency rTMS of left DLPF cortex, delivered 10 min. after capsaicin application. We performed also two control experiments to explore: 1: the effects of Left DLPFC rTMS on capsaicin-induced pain; 2: the modulatory influence of left DLPFC rTMS on motor cortex without capsaicin application. Capsaicin-induced pain significantly reduced test MEP amplitude and decreased SICI leaving ICF unchanged. Left DLPFC rTMS, together with the analgesic effect, was able to revert the effects of capsaicin-induced pain on motor cortex restoring normal MEP and SICI levels. These data support the notion that that tonic pain exerts modulatory influence on motor intracortical excitability; the activation of left DLPFC by hf rTMS could have analgesic effects, reverting also the motor cortex excitability changes induced by pain stimulation.
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an emerging novel treatment modality for psychiatric disorders, particularly major depression. A device for delivery of TMS was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of major depressive disorder in adults. TMS is being studied for a variety of psychiatric disorders, including obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia. In this article, we describe TMS and its neurobiologic basis, as well as the efficacy and safety data of TMS with regard to a range of psychiatric disorders.
Collapse
|
29
|
The use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to relieve pain. Brain Stimul 2008; 1:337-44. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2008.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 140] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2008] [Revised: 07/22/2008] [Accepted: 07/23/2008] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
|
30
|
rTMS in headache prophylaxis: when case reports hide our ignorance. CNS Spectr 2008; 13:185-6; author reply 186-7. [PMID: 18323751 DOI: 10.1017/s1092852900028418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|