Adding Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Before Occipital Nerve Stimulation in Fibromyalgia

The study protocol of a double-blind randomized controlled trial of EMDR and multifocal transcranial current stimulation (MtCS) as augmentation strategy in patients with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a generalized, widespread chronic pain disorder affecting 2.7% of the general population. In recent years, different studies have observed a strong association between FM and psychological trauma. Therefore, a trauma-focused psychotherapy, such as Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), combined with a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, such as multifocal transcranial current stimulation (MtCS), could be an innovative adjunctive treatment option. This double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) analyzes if EMDR therapy is effective in the reduction of pain symptoms in FM patients, and if its potential is boosted with the addition of MtCS.

METHODS

Ninety-six patients with FM and a history of traumatic events will be randomly allocated to the treatment as usual (TAU) condition, EMDR + active-MtCS condition, or EMDR + sham-MtCS condition. Therapists and patients will be kept blind to MtCS conditions, and raters will be kept blind to both EMDR and MtCS. All patients will be evaluated at baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up at 6 months after post-treatment. Evaluations will assess the following variables: sociodemographic data, pain, psychological trauma, sleep disturbance, anxiety and affective symptoms, wellbeing, self-care, emotional regulation, self-esteem, and cognitive functioning.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence of whether EMDR therapy is effective in reducing pain symptoms in FM patients, and whether the effect of EMDR can be enhanced by MtCS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 2 August 2019, identifier: NCT04084795.

The Application of tDCS to Treat Pain and Psychocognitive Symptoms in Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review

Background

The use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate pain, psychological aspects, and cognitive functions has increased in recent years. The present scoping review aims to investigate the use of tDCS in cancer patients and its significant impact on psychocognitive and pain related symptoms.

Methods

From the earliest available date to June 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted in three electronic scientific databases-PubMed, Scopus, and Embase-and other supplementary sources. Ten relevant studies were identified and included, comprising single case studies, randomized controlled trials, pilot studies, and one retrospective study. PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews were followed.

Results

These studies investigated the use of tDCS to improve pain and psychocognitive aspects in patients with various types of cancer, including breast, oral, bladder, lung, pancreatic, head and neck cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and meningioma. Overall, the results suggest that tDCS has shown efficacy in relieving pain, reducing anxiety and depression, and improving cognitive function in cancer patients.

Conclusion

Due to the limited number and high heterogeneity of the existing literature in this field, more investigation and the establishment of standardized protocols would be required to obtain more conclusive evidence.

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.

Efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in the treatment of fibromyalgia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To update a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for analgesia, for antidepressant effects, and to reduce the impact of fibromyalgia (FM), looking for optimal areas of stimulation.

METHODS

We searched five databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing active and sham tDCS for FM. The primary outcome was pain intensity, and secondary outcome measures included FM Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) and depression score. Meta-analysis was conducted using standardized mean difference (SMD). Subgroup analysis was performed to determine the effects of different regional stimulation, over the primary motor cortex (M1), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), opercular-insular cortex (OIC), and occipital nerve (ON) regions. We analyzed the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by the value of the mean difference (MD) for an 11-point scale for pain, the Beck Depressive Inventory-II (BDI-II), and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) score. We described the certainty of the evidence (COE) using the tool GRADE profile.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included in the analysis. Active tDCS had a positive effect on pain (SMD= -1.04; 95 % CI -1.38 to -0.69), depression (SMD= -0.46; 95 % CI -0.64 to -0.29), FIQ (SMD= -0.73; 95 % CI -1.09 to -0.36), COE is moderate. Only group M1 (SD=-1.57) and DLPFC (SD=-1.44) could achieve MCID for analgesia; For BDI-II, only group DLPFC (SD=-5.36) could achieve an MCID change. Adverse events were mild.

CONCLUSION

tDCS is a safe intervention that relieves pain intensity, reduces depression, and reduces the impact of FM on life. Achieving an MCID is related to the stimulation site and the target symptom.

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.

Efficacy of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Pain Level and Disability of Patients with Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials with Parallel-Group Design

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been increasingly applied in fibromyalgia (FM) to reduce pain and fatigue. While results are promising, observed effects are variable, and there are questions about optimal stimulation parameters such as target region (e.g., motor vs. prefrontal cortices). This systematic review aimed to provide the latest update on published randomized controlled trials with a parallel-group design to examine the specific effects of active tDCS in reducing pain and disability in FM patients. Using the PRISMA approach, a literature search identified 14 randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of tDCS on pain and fatigue in patients with FM. Assessment of biases shows an overall low-to-moderate risk of bias. tDCS was found effective in all included studies conducted in patients with FM, except one study, in which the improving effects of tDCS were due to placebo. We recommended tDCS over the motor and prefrontal cortices as "effective" and "probably effective" respectively, and also safe for reducing pain perception and fatigue in patients with FM, according to evidence-based guidelines. Stimulation polarity was anodal in all studies, and one single-session study also examined cathodal polarity. The stimulation intensity ranged from 1-mA (7.14% of studies) to 1.5-mA (7.14% of studies) and 2-mA (85.7% of studies). In all of the included studies, a significant improvement in at least one outcome variable (pain or fatigue reduction) was observed. Moreover, 92.8% (13 of 14) applied multi-session tDCS protocols in FM treatment and reported significant improvement in their outcome variables. While tDCS is therapeutically effective for FM, titration studies that systematically evaluate different stimulation intensities, durations, and electrode placement are needed.

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.

The Analgesic Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression of Potential Influencers of Clinical Effect

BACKGROUND

There is tentative evidence to support the analgesic effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in fibromyalgia (FM), with large variability in the effect size (ES) encountered in different clinical trials. Understanding the source of the variability and exploring how it relates to the clinical results could characterize effective neuromodulation protocols and ultimately guide care in FM pain. The primary objective of this study was to determine the effect of tDCS in FM pain as compared with sham tDCS. The secondary objective was to explore the relationship of methodology, population, and intervention factors and the analgesic effect of tDCS in FM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For the primary objective, a systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating tDCS as an intervention for FM pain were searched in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Web Of Science. Studies were excluded if they used cross-over designs or if they did not use tDCS as an intervention for pain or did not measure clinical pain. Analysis for the main outcome was performed using a random-effects model. Risk of bias and evidence certainty were assessed for all studies using Cochrane Risk of Bias and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tools. For the secondary objective, a meta-regression was conducted to explore methodology, population, and intervention factors potentially related to the ES.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs were included. Six studies presented a high risk of bias. Significant reduction in pain scores were found for FM (standardized mean difference = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.80-1.65, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis considering tDCS as a neural target revealed no differences between common neural sites. Meta-regression revealed that the duration of the tDCS protocol in weeks was the only factor associated with the ES, in which protocols that lasted four weeks or longer reported larger ES than shorter protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest an analgesic effect of tDCS in FM. tDCS protocols that last four weeks or more may be associated with larger ESs. Definite conclusions are inadequate given the large heterogeneity and limited quality of evidence of the included studies.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with fibromyalgia. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) is a chronic pathology characterized by widespread pain commonly associated with psychological distress affecting quality of life. In recent years, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have been investigated to treat chronic pain. The aim of the current review is to determine the effects of tDCS and TMS on the main symptoms of patients with FM.

DEVELOPMENT

A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines was carried out. The search strategy was performed in MEDLINE, SCOPUS, PEDro and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials based on the effects of tDCS and TMS on pain, pressure pain threshold (PPT), fatigue, anxiety and depression, catastrophizing and quality of life in patients with FM were analysed. Fourteen studies were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of tDCS to the motor cortex is the only intervention shown to decrease pain in the short and medium-term in patients with FM. The application of both interventions showed improvements in PPT, catastrophizing and quality of life when applied to the motor cortex, and in fatigue when applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The effects of these interventions on anxiety and depression are unclear.

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.

Time since onset might be of essence: A recommendation to assess the effects of combination of non-pharmacological neuromodulatory approaches at early stage since symptoms onset

In the past decade researchers began to assess the potential beneficial effects of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) combined with a behavioral task as a treatment approach for various medical conditions. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the motor cortex combined with another treatment approach has been assessed as analgesic treatment in neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain conditions, and was found to exert only modest pain relief. Our group results show that combined tDCS and mirror therapy dramatically reduced acute phantom limb pain intensity with long-lasting effects, potentially preventing pain chronification. A review of the scientific literature indicates that our approach differs from that of others: We applied the intervention at the acute stage of the disease, whereas other studies applied the intervention in patients whose disease had already been established. We suggest that the timing of administration of the combined intervention is critical. Unlike in patients with chronic painful condition, in which the maladaptive plasticity associated with pain chronification and chronicity is well-consolidated, early treatment at the acute pain stage may be more successful in counterbalancing the not-yet consolidated maladaptive plasticity. We encourage the research community to test our hypothesis, both in the treatment of pain, and beyond.

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.

Non-invasive transcranial electrical brain stimulation guided by functional near-infrared spectroscopy for targeted neuromodulation: A review

One of the primary goals in cognitive neuroscience is to understand the neural mechanisms on which cognition is based. Researchers are trying to find how cognitive mechanisms are related to oscillations generated due to brain activity. The research focused on this topic has been considerably aided by developing non-invasive brain stimulation techniques. The dynamics of brain networks and the resultant behavior can be affected by non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, which make their use a focus of interest in many experiments and clinical fields. One essential non-invasive brain stimulation technique is transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), subdivided into transcranial direct and alternating current stimulation. tES has recently become more well-known because of the effective results achieved in treating chronic conditions. In addition, there has been exceptional progress in the interpretation and feasibility of tES techniques. Summarizing the beneficial effects of tES, this article provides an updated depiction of what has been accomplished to date, brief history, and the open questions that need to be addressed in the future. An essential issue in the field of tES is stimulation duration. This review briefly covers the stimulation durations that have been utilized in the field while monitoring the brain using functional-near infrared spectroscopy-based brain imaging.

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.

Paired Acute Invasive/Non-invasive Stimulation (PAINS) study: A phase I/II randomized, sham-controlled crossover trial in chronic neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation, an invasive method of neuromodulation, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive method of altering cortical excitability, have both proven effective in relieving chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE

We employed a randomized, sham-controlled crossover study design to investigate whether single-session tDCS would have an additive therapeutic effect alongside DRG stimulation (DRGS) in the treatment of chronic pain.

METHODS

Sixteen neuropathic pain patients who were previously implanted with DRG stimulators were recruited. Baseline pain scores were established with DRGS-OFF. Pain scores were then recorded with DRGS-ON, after paired sham tDCS stimulation, and after paired active anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) stimulation. For active tDCS, patients were randomized to 'MEG (magnetoencephalography) localized' tDCS or contralateral motor cortex (M1) tDCS for 30 min. EEG recordings and evaluations of tDCS adverse effects were also collected.

RESULTS

All participants reported the interventions to be tolerable with no significant adverse effects during the session. Paired DRGS/active tDCS resulted in a significant reduction in pain scores compared to paired DRGS-ON/sham tDCS or DRGS alone. There was no difference in the additive effect of M1 vs. MEG-localized tDCS. Significant augmentation of beta activity was observed between DRGS-OFF and DRGS-ON conditions, as well as between paired DRGS-ON/sham tDCS and paired DRGS-ON/active tDCS.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that a single session of tDCS alongside DRGS is safe and can significantly reduce pain acutely in neuropathic pain patients. Paired invasive/non-invasive neuromodulation is a promising new treatment strategy for pain management and should be evaluated further to assess long-term benefits.

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

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on pain and quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia.

METHODS

Thirty participants were randomized into two groups of 15 patients, to receive 3 sessions of either high-frequency (10 Hz) rTMS or 2 mA, 20 min anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) over 1 week. Pain was assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) before treatment, immediately after treatment, 6 and 12 weeks later. Quality of life was evaluated using the Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR) and psychiatric symptoms were measured using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 Item (DASS-21) before treatment, and 6 and 12 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

For the VAS there was a significant time-group interaction, showing that the behavior of two groups differed regarding changes of VAS in favor of the RTMS group (df = 1.73, F = 4.80, p = <0.016). Time-group interaction effect on DASS-21 and FIQR was not significant. 66.6% of patients in rTMS group and 26.6% of patients in tDCS group experienced at least a 30% reduction of VAS from baseline to last follow-up (p = 0.028).

DISCUSSION

With the methodology used in this study, both rTMS and tDCS were safe modalities and three sessions of rTMS over DLPFC had greater and longer lasting analgesic effects compared to tDCS in patients with FM. However, considering the limitations of this study, further studies are needed to explore the most effective modality.

Augmentation of EMDR with multifocal transcranial current stimulation (MtCS) in the treatment of fibromyalgia: study protocol of a double-blind randomized controlled exploratory and pragmatic trial

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a generalized, widespread chronic pain disorder affecting 2.7% of the general population. In recent years, different studies have observed a strong association between FM and psychological trauma. Therefore, a trauma-focused psychotherapy, such as eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR), combined with a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, such as multifocal transcranial current stimulation (MtCS), could be an innovative adjunctive treatment option. This double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) analyzes if EMDR therapy is effective in the reduction of pain symptoms in FM patients and if its potential is boosted with the addition of MtCS.

METHODS

Forty-five patients with FM and a history of traumatic events will be randomly allocated to Waiting List, EMDR + active-MtCS, or EMDR + sham-MtCS. Therapists and patients will be kept blind to MtCS conditions, and raters will be kept blind to both EMDR and MtCS. All patients will be evaluated at baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up at 6 months after post-treatment. Evaluations will assess the following variables: sociodemographic data, pain, psychological trauma, sleep disturbance, anxiety and affective symptoms, and wellbeing.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence of whether EMDR therapy is effective in reducing pain symptoms in FM patients, and whether the effect of EMDR can be enhanced by MtCS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04084795 . Registered on 2 August 2019.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with fibromyalgia. A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) is a chronic pathology characterized by widespread pain commonly associated with psychological distress affecting quality of life. In recent years, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have been investigated to treat chronic pain. The aim of the current review is to determine the effects of tDCS and TMS on the main symptoms of patients with FM.

DEVELOPMENT

A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines was carried out. The search strategy was performed in Medline, Scopus, PEDro and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials based on the effects of tDCS and TMS on pain, pressure pain threshold, fatigue, anxiety and depression, catastrophizing and quality of life in patients with FM were analysed. Fourteen studies were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of tDCS to the motor cortex is the only intervention shown to decrease pain in the short and medium-term in patients with FM. The application of both interventions showed improvements in pressure pain threshold, catastrophizing and quality of life when applied to the motor cortex, and in fatigue when applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The effects of these interventions on anxiety and depression are unclear.

The effectiveness and safety of electrotherapy in the management of fibromyalgia

Treating fibromyalgia is a challenging task for physicians. With its multifaceted features, fibromyalgia requires a comprehensive management strategy focusing on both the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options. During the last decades, there has been growing evidence regarding the role of electrotherapy in fibromyalgia treatment. In this regard, the present article aimed to review the recent literature on the effectiveness and safety of the electrotherapy in the treatment of fibromyalgia. A literature search was conducted through PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), non-invasive brain stimulation (transcranial direct current/magnetic stimulation), and light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation (LASER) emerged as the most commonly examined electrotherapy techniques in fibromyalgia. Currently, there is growing data regarding the effectiveness of electrotherapy in the management of fibromyalgia-related pain. Besides, non-invasive electrotherapy techniques are related to no/minor side effects. Further studies are warranted to identify the optimal treatment protocols for each electrotherapy modality.

Brain Modulation by Electric Currents in Fibromyalgia: A Structured Review on Non-invasive Approach With Transcranial Electrical Stimulation

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a complex disorder where widespread musculoskeletal pain is associated with many heterogenous symptoms ranging from affective disturbances to cognitive dysfunction and central fatigue. FMS is currently underdiagnosed and often very poorly responsive to pharmacological treatment. Pathophysiology of the disease remains still obscure even if in the last years fine structural and functional cerebral abnormalities have been identified, principally by neurophysiological and imaging studies delineating disfunctions in pain perception, processing and control systems. On such basis, recently, neurostimulation of brain areas involved in mechanism of pain processing and control (primary motor cortex: M1 and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: DLPFC) has been explored by means of different approaches and particularly through non-invasive brain stimulation techniques (transcranial magnetic and electric stimulation: TMS and tES). Here we summarize studies on tES application in FMS. The great majority of reports, based on direct currents (transcranial direct currents stimulation: tDCS) and targeting M1, showed efficacy on pain measures and less on cognitive and affective symptoms, even if several aspects as maintenance of therapeutical effects and optimal stimulation parameters remain to be established. Differently, stimulation of DLPFC, explored in a few studies, was ineffective on pain and showed limited effects on cognitive and affective symptoms. Very recently new tES techniques as high-density tDCS (HD-tDCS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) and tDCS devices for home-based treatment have been explored in FMS with interesting even if very preliminary results opening interesting perspectives for more effective, well tolerated, cheap and easy therapeutic approaches.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation as a Therapeutic Tool for Chronic Pain

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modulates spontaneous neuronal activity that can generate long-term neuroplastic changes. It has been used in numerous therapeutic trials showing significant clinical effects especially when combined with other behavioral therapies. One area of intensive tDCS research is chronic pain. Since the initial tDCS trials for chronic pain treatment using current parameters of stimulation, more than 60 clinical trials have been published testing its effects in different pain syndromes. However, as the field moves in the direction of clinical application, several aspects need to be taken into consideration regarding tDCS effectiveness and parameters of stimulation. In this article, we reviewed the evidence of tDCS effects for the treatment of chronic pain and critically analyzed the literature pertaining its safety and efficacy, and how to optimize tDCS clinical effects in a therapeutic setting. We discuss optimization of tDCS effects in 3 different domains: (i) parameters of stimulation, (ii) combination therapies, and (iii) subject selection. This article aims to provide insights for the development of future tDCS clinical trials.