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

Analgesia of noninvasive electrical stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is implicated in pain modulation, suggesting its potential as a therapeutic target for pain relief. However, studies on transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) over the DLPFC yielded diverse results, likely due to differences in stimulation protocols or pain assessment methods. This study aims to evaluate the analgesic effects of DLPFC-tES using a meta-analytical approach.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of 29 studies involving 785 participants was conducted. The effects of genuine and sham DLPFC-tES on pain perception were examined in healthy individuals and patients with clinical pain. Subgroup analyses explored the impact of stimulation parameters and pain modalities.

RESULTS

DLPFC-tES did not significantly affect pain outcomes in healthy populations but showed promise in reducing pain-intensity ratings in patients with clinical pain (Hedges' g = -0.78, 95% CI = [-1.33, -0.24], p = 0.005). Electrode placement significantly influenced the analgesic effect, with better results observed when the anode was at F3 and the cathode at F4.

CONCLUSIONS

DLPFC-tES holds potential as a cost-effective pain management option, particularly for clinical populations. Optimizing electrode placement, especially with an symmetrical configuration, may enhance therapeutic efficacy. These findings underscore the promise of DLPFC-tES for alleviating perceived pain intensity in clinical settings, emphasizing the importance of electrode placement optimization.

No add-on therapeutic benefit of at-home anodal tDCS of the primary motor cortex to mindfulness meditation in patients with fibromyalgia

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the efficacy of combining at-home anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the left primary motor cortex (M1) with mindfulness meditation (MM) in fibromyalgia patients trained in mindfulness.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients were allocated to receive ten daily sessions of MM paired with either anodal or sham tDCS over the primary motor cortex. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were psychological impairment, sleep quality, mood, affective pain, mindfulness level, and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measures of cortical excitability. Outcomes were analyzed pre- and post-treatment, with a one-month follow-up.

RESULTS

We found post-tDCS improvement in all clinical outcomes, including mindfulness level, except for positive affect and stress, in both groups without significant difference between active and sham conditions. No significant group*time interaction was found for all clinical and TMS outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate no synergistic or add-on efffect of anodal tDCS of the left M1 compared to the proper effect of MM in patients with fibromyalgia.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our findings challenge the potential of combining anodal tDCS of the left M1 and MM in fibromyalgia.

Combining Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Non-Invasive Interventions for Chronic Primary Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A growing number of studies has combined transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with other non-invasive non-pharmacological therapies (NINPT) to enhance effects in pain reduction. However, the efficacy of these combined approaches in treating chronic primary pain (CPP) warrants thorough investigation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of tDCS in conjunction with other NINPT in alleviating pain severity among CPP patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tDCS combined with NINPT against control treatments in adult CPP patients. The search spanned multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL.

RESULTS

Our systematic review included 11 RCTs with a total of 449 participants. In our meta-analysis, which comprised 228 participants receiving active-tDCS and 221 receiving sham-tDCS, we found a significant reduction in pain intensity (Standard Mean Difference = -0.73; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = -1.18 to -0.27; P = .002) with the use of active-tDCS combined with NINPT.

CONCLUSION

These findings substantiate the therapeutic potential of combining tDCS with other NINPT, highlighting it as an effective treatment modality for reducing pain intensity in CPP patients.

Evaluating the effects of tDCS on depressive and anxiety symptoms from a transdiagnostic perspective: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Depressive and anxiety symptoms are prevalent among patients with various clinical conditions, resulting in diminished emotional well-being and impaired daily functioning. The neural mechanisms underlying these symptoms, particularly across different disorders, remain unclear, limiting the effectiveness of conventional treatments. Therefore, it is crucial to elucidate the neural underpinnings of depressive and anxiety symptoms and investigate novel, effective treatments across clinical conditions. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique that can help understand the neural underpinnings of symptoms and facilitate the development of interventions, addressing the two research gaps at both neural and clinical levels. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the existing evidence regarding the therapeutic efficacy of tDCS in reducing depressive and anxiety symptoms among individuals with diverse clinical diagnoses. This review evaluated evidence from fifty-six randomized, sham-controlled trials that administered repeated tDCS sessions with a parallel design, applying a three-level meta-analytic model. tDCS targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) at 2-mA intensity demonstrates moderate efficacy in alleviating depressive symptoms, identifying the left DLPFC as a transdiagnostic neural mechanism of depressive symptoms across clinical conditions. In comparison, the findings on anxiety symptoms demonstrate greater heterogeneity. tDCS over the left DLPFC is effective in reducing depressive symptoms and shows promising effects in alleviating anxiety symptoms among individuals with diverse diagnoses. These findings enhance our understanding of the neuropsychological basis of depressive and anxiety symptoms, laying the groundwork for the development of more effective tDCS interventions applicable across clinical conditions.

Evidence and sources of placebo effects in transcranial direct current stimulation during a single session of visuospatial working memory practice

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to non-invasively augment cognitive training. However, the benefits of tDCS may be due in part to placebo effects, which have not been well-characterized. The purpose of this study was to determine whether tDCS can have a measurable placebo effect on cognitive training and to identify potential sources of this effect. Eighty-three right-handed adults were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control (no exposure to tDCS), sham tDCS, or active tDCS. The sham and active tDCS groups were double-blinded. Each group performed 20 min of an adapted Corsi Block Tapping Task (CBTT), a visuospatial working memory task. Anodal or sham tDCS was applied during CBTT training in a right parietal-left supraorbital montage. After training, active and sham tDCS groups were surveyed on expectations about tDCS efficacy. Linear mixed effects models showed that the tDCS groups (active and sham combined) improved more on the CBTT with training than the control group, suggesting a placebo effect of tDCS. Participants' tDCS expectations were significantly related to the placebo effect, as was the belief of receiving active stimulation. This placebo effect shows that the benefits of tDCS on cognitive training can occur even in absence of active stimulation. Future tDCS studies should consider how treatment expectations may be a source of the placebo effect in tDCS research, and identify ways to potentially leverage them to maximize treatment benefit.

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.

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 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.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

SIGNIFICANCE

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

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

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

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

Background

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Systematic review registration

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

Pain reduction in fibromyalgia syndrome through pairing transcranial direct current stimulation and mindfulness meditation: A randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled pilot clinical trial

Background

This double-blinded, randomized and sham-controlled pilot clinical trial aimed to investigate the preliminary clinical efficacy and feasibility of combining mindfulness meditation (MM) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for pain and associated symptoms in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS).

Methods

Included FMS patients (age: 33 to 70) were randomized to three different groups to receive either ten daily sessions of anodal tDCS over the left primary motor cortex paired with MM for 20 min (active + MM, n = 10), sham tDCS combined with MM (sham + MM, n = 10) or no intervention (NoT, n = 10). Patients in the bimodal therapy groups received a week of training in MM prior to the stimulation. Participants reported pain intensity, the primary outcome, by filling in a pain diary daily throughout the whole study. They were also evaluated for quality of life, pressure pain sensitivity, psychological wellbeing, sleep quality and sleep quantity. Assessments were performed at three time points (baseline, immediately after treatment and one-month follow-up).

Results

Participants in the active + MM group did not exhibit reduced pain intensity following the bimodal therapy compared to controls. Patients in active group demonstrated clinically meaningful and significantly higher quality of life following the therapeutic intervention than other groups. There was no significant difference among groups regarding pressure pain sensitivity, sleep parameters and psychological scales. The combined treatment was well tolerated among participants, with no serious adverse effects.

Conclusion

This study was the first to pair these two effective non-pharmacological therapies for pain management in FMS. In the light of an underpowered sample size, repetitive anodal tDCS combined with MM did not improve pain or FMS-associated symptoms. However, patients in the active + MM group reported higher quality of life than the control groups. Studies with more participants and longer follow-ups are required to confirm our findings.

Clinical trial registration

[www.drks.de], identifier [DRKS00023490].

Using High-Definition Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation to Treat Patients with Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Double-Blinded Controlled Study

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of high-definition transcranial alternating current stimulation (HD-tACS) to the left primary motor cortex (M1) in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) patients. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial, patients with FM were recruited in a teaching hospital. Thirty-eight patients were randomized to active HD-tACS (n = 19) or sham stimulation (n = 19). Active stimulation included a daily session of 20-min stimulation of 1 mA HD-tACS over the left M1 for ten sessions in two weeks. The primary outcome was the change in pain intensity and quality of life, assessed using the numeric rating scale (NRS) and the fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQ) at baseline and after two weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes included other core symptoms of FM (psychological distress, sleep quality, hyperalgesia measured by pressure pain threshold) and changes in biomarkers’ total Tau and Aβ1-42. All analyses were based on intention-to-treat for a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: Of the 38 randomized patients, 35 completed the study. After two weeks, HD-tACS induced a significant reduction in FIQ score post-treatment. However, there were no significant differences in NRS and FIQ scores compared to sham stimulation. Most adverse events were mild in severity. Nevertheless, one patient receiving HD-tACS attempted suicide during the trial. Conclusions: These results suggest that HD-tACS may effectively reduce pain, psychological distress, and symptom impacts in FM patients. However, we found no significant differences between the two groups. Future studies investigating HD-tACS in FM are warranted.

Determining the Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Tinnitus, Depression, and Anxiety: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: Tinnitus is the awareness of a sound in the absence of an external source. It affects around 10–15% of people, a significant proportion of whom also experience symptoms such as depression or anxiety that negatively affect their quality of life. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a technique involving constant low-intensity direct current delivered via scalp electrodes. It is a potential treatment option for tinnitus, as well as tinnitus-related conditions such as depression and anxiety. This systematic review estimates the effects of tDCS on outcomes relevant to tinnitus. In addition, it sheds light on the relationship between stimulation parameters and the effect of tDCS on these outcomes; (2) Methods: Exhaustive searches of electronic databases were conducted. Randomised controlled trials were included if they reported at least one of the following outcomes: tinnitus symptom severity, anxiety, or depression. Where available, data on quality of life, adverse effects, and neurophysiological changes were also reviewed. GRADE was used to assess the certainty in the estimate; (3) Results: Meta-analyses revealed a statistically significant reduction in tinnitus (moderate certainty) and depression (low certainty)-but not anxiety-following active tDCS compared to sham control. Network meta-analyses revealed potential optimal stimulation parameters; (4) Conclusions: The evidence synthesised in this review suggests tDCS has the potential to reduce symptom severity in tinnitus and depression. It further narrows down the number of potentially optimal stimulation parameters.

Cortical stimulation for chronic pain: from anecdote to evidence

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

Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex sensing analgesia

Chronic pain often has an unknown cause, and many patients with chronic pain learn to accept that their pain is incurable and pharmacologic treatments are only temporarily effective. Complementary and integrative health approaches for pain are thus in high demand. One such approach is soft touch, e.g., adhesion of pyramidal thorn patches in a pain region. The effects of patch adhesion on pain relief have been confirmed in patients with various types of pain. A recent study using near-infrared spectroscopy revealed that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), especially the left side, is likely to be inactivated in patients experiencing pain relief during patch treatment. Mindfulness meditation is another well-known complementary and integrative approach for achieving pain relief. The relation between pain relief due to mindfulness meditation and changes in brain regions, including the DLPFC, has long been examined. In the present review article, we survey the literature describing the effects of the above-mentioned complementary and integrative treatments on pain relief, and outline the important brain regions, including the DLPFC, that are involved in analgesia. We hope that the present article will provide clues to researchers who hope to advance neurosensory treatments for pain relief without medication.

The Role of Expectation and Beliefs on the Effects of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques are used in clinical and cognitive neuroscience to induce a mild magnetic or electric field in the brain to modulate behavior and cortical activation. Despite the great body of literature demonstrating promising results, unexpected or even paradoxical outcomes are sometimes observed. This might be due either to technical and methodological issues (e.g., stimulation parameters, stimulated brain area), or to participants’ expectations and beliefs before and during the stimulation sessions. In this narrative review, we present some studies showing that placebo and nocebo effects, associated with positive and negative expectations, respectively, could be present in NIBS trials, both in experimental and in clinical settings. The lack of systematic evaluation of subjective expectations and beliefs before and after stimulation could represent a caveat that overshadows the potential contribution of placebo and nocebo effects in the outcome of NIBS trials.