The analgesic effect of therapeutic rTMS is not mediated or predicted by comorbid psychiatric or sleep disorders

Predictors for quality of life improvement following rTMS treatment in neuropathic pain patients

OBJECTIVES

Recently, Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) has gained attention for its potential in relieving neuropathic pain (NP). NP encompasses central and peripheral neuralgia, characterized by sensory abnormalities and spontaneous pain. Pharmacological treatments often provide partial relief with significant side effects, making rTMS an attractive alternative. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of rTMS in treating NP and its impact on quality of life over three months.

METHODS

A total of 51 patients with drug-resistant NP were included, undergoing 15 sessions of rTMS targeting motor cortex areas over three weeks. Clinical response was evaluated using various psychometric scales, including VAS for pain and PGIC. Quality of life was assessed using the SF-36 questionnaire.

RESULTS

Results showed significant clinical improvements in pain severity and quality of life following rTMS treatment. Predictive factors of quality of life improvement were identified, with mental health being crucial across all NP areas. Notably, patients with cerebral NP showed improvements linked to physical dimensions, emphasizing tailored treatment approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

This study underscores the efficacy of rTMS in managing NP, highlighting sustained improvements in pain severity and quality of life. The findings offer valuable insights for personalized treatment approaches and optimizing patient outcomes in NP management.

Insomnia among patients with chronic pain: A retrospective study

Insomnia can coexist with chronic pain and is a major cause of rapidly increasing medical expenses. However, insomnia has not been fully evaluated in patients with chronic pain. This retrospective study aimed to identify the risk factors for insomnia in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. A total of 301 patients with chronic non-cancer pain were enrolled. Patients with the Athens insomnia scale scores ≥ 6 and < 6 were classified into insomnia (+) and insomnia (-) groups, respectively. All patients completed self-report questionnaires as part of their chronic pain treatment approach. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to predict insomnia. We found that 219 of 301 (72.8%) patients met the AIS criteria for insomnia. Significant differences were depicted between patients with and without insomnia in terms of body mass index, numeric rating scale, pain catastrophizing scale, hospital anxiety, and depression scale (HADS), pain disability assessment scale, EuroQol 5 dimension (EQ5D), and pain self-efficacy questionnaire. Multiple regression analysis identified the numeric rating scale, HADS, and EQ5D scores as factors related to insomnia in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Anxiety, depression, and disability were associated with a greater tendency toward insomnia. HADS and EQ5D scores are useful screening tools for preventing insomnia in patients with chronic non-cancer pain.

rTMS targeted to the secondary somatosensory cortex influences sleep in CRPS patients, as measured with the OURA ring

INTRODUCTION

Chronic pain associates with various sleep problems. Patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) often report impaired sleep, but objective measurements of sleep in CRPS patients are scarce. Neuromodulation with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can alleviate pain and improve sleep. Secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) is a possible rTMS target for the treatment of chronic pain, but the effect of S2-targeted rTMS on sleep is unknown.

METHODS

This randomized, sham-controlled trial assessed the effect of S2-targeted rTMS on sleep in patients with CRPS. Patients (n = 31) received either S2-targeted rTMS (10 Hz) or sham stimulation for 3 weeks. The effect of treatment on sleep was assessed with validated questionnaires, with a sleep and pain diary, and with a consumer-grade sleep tracker, the Oura ring. In addition to an ordinary univariate analysis of the results, we conducted multivariate testing of the Oura data using linear discriminant analysis (LDA).

RESULTS

S2-targeted rTMS decreased sleep restlessness that significantly differed between the rTMS and sham stimulation patient groups (p = .028). In the multivariate analysis of the Oura data, LDA classification accuracy to separate the rTMS and sham groups exceeded 95% confidence level in four out of the seven tested models. In the subjective evaluation of sleep, the effect of rTMS and sham did not differ.

CONCLUSION

S2-targeted rTMS influenced sleep in patients with CRPS. Improved sleep may enhance CRPS symptom alleviation and be of clinical importance. A univariate analysis could separate the rTMS and sham treatments. The multivariate analysis revealed that including multiple sleep-related parameters can be beneficial when analyzing rTMS effects on sleep. As sleep is related both to pain and quality of life, and sleep rTMS can be directly affected by rTMS, objective monitoring of sleep in various future rTMS trials could be fruitful.

Impact of antidepressant medication on the analgetic effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment of neuropathic pain. Preliminary findings from a registry study

OBJECTIVES

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been found to be effective in chronic neuropathic pain conditions. However, information about the combined effects of rTMS and antidepressant treatment is scarce. We studied the outcome of rTMS and concurrent antidepressant treatment in patients with neuropathic pain.

METHODS

In this retrospective, real-world study, 34 patients with neuropathic pain, who were considered resistant or not benefitting from conventional treatment, received rTMS treatment between 2017 and 2020. Pain-related factors were measured using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Global Impression of Change (GIC), and Beck Depression Inventory.

RESULTS

A decrease in pain intensity and pain interference assessed with NRS was observed after 10 treatment sessions in 16 patients. The impression of change was positive in 20 patients. Half of the patients (n=17) used antidepressant medication, while half (n=17) did not. A concurrent use of antidepressants with therapeutic rTMS was significantly linked with less pain intensity relief when compared with the nonuse of antidepressants (p=0.019). The impression of change was significantly in favor of the antidepressant nonuser group (p=0.002). No group differences in pain interference were found between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic rTMS for neuropathic pain is plausibly sensitive to interference with antidepressant medication. The exact mechanism of our findings remains to be elucidated; confirmatory studies are warranted.

Sleep disorders in chronic pain and its neurochemical mechanisms: a narrative review

Chronic pain (CP) is a prevalent problem, and more than half of patients with CP have sleep disorders. CP comorbidity with sleep disorders imposes immense suffering and seriously affects the patient's quality of life, which is a challenging issue encountered by clinicians. Although the reciprocal interactions between pain and sleep have been studied to some degree, there is still a lack of awareness and comprehensive description of CP comorbidity with sleep disorders. In this narrative review article, we summarize the current knowledge about the present estimates of the prevalence of comorbid sleep disorders in CP patients, sleep detection methods, sleep characterization in CP, and the effect of sleep disorders on CP and current therapies. We also summarize current knowledge of the neurochemical mechanisms of CP comorbidity with sleep disorders. In conclusion, insufficient attention has been paid to the role of sleep disorders in CP patients, and CP patients should be screened for sleep disorders in the clinic. Special attention should be given to a possible risk of drug-drug interaction when using two types of drugs targeting pain and sleep simultaneously. The current insight into the neurobiological mechanisms underlying CP comorbidity with sleep disorders is still rather limited.

Application of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Review

Neuropathic pain, affecting 6.9-10% of the general population, has a negative impact on patients' quality of life and potentially leads to functional impairment and disability. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)-a safe, indirect and non-invasive technique-has been increasingly applied for treating neuropathic pain. The mechanism underlying rTMS is not yet well understood, and the analgesic effects of rTMS have been inconsistent with respect to different settings/parameters, causing insufficient evidence to determine its efficacy in patients with neuropathic pain. This narrative review aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of rTMS for treating neuropathic pain as well as to summarize the treatment protocols and related adverse effects from existing clinical trials. Current evidence supports the use of 10 Hz HF-rTMS of the primary motor cortex to reduce neuropathic pain, especially in patients with spinal cord injury, diabetic neuropathy and post-herpetic neuralgia. However, the lack of standardized protocols impedes the universal use of rTMS for neuropathic pain. rTMS was hypothesized to achieve analgesic effects by upregulating the pain threshold, inhibiting pain impulse, modulating the brain cortex, altering imbalanced functional connectivity, regulating neurotrophin and increasing endogenous opioid and anti-inflammatory cytokines. Further studies are warranted to explore the differences in the parameters/settings of rTMS for treating neuropathic pain due to different disease types.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex in stroke survivors-more than motor rehabilitation: A mini-review

Stroke is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among elderly populations worldwide. During the early phase of stroke, restoring blood circulation is of utmost importance to protect neurons from further injury. Once the initial condition is stabilized, various rehabilitation techniques can be applied to help stroke survivors gradually regain their affected functions. Among these techniques, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a novel method to assess and modulate cortical excitability non-invasively and aid stroke survivors in the rehabilitation process. Different cortical regions have been targeted using TMS based on the underlying pathology and distorted function. Despite the lack of a standard operational procedure, repetitive TMS (rTMS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) is considered a promising intervention for post-stroke motor rehabilitation. However, apart from the motor response, mounting evidence suggests that M1 stimulation can be employed to treat other symptoms such as dysphagia, speech impairments, central post-stroke pain, depression, and cognitive dysfunction. In this mini-review, we summarize the therapeutic uses of rTMS stimulation over M1 in stroke survivors and discuss the potential mechanistic rationale behind it.

A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Targeting M1 and S2 in Central Poststroke Pain: A Pilot Trial

OBJECTIVES

Central poststroke pain (CPSP), a neuropathic pain condition, is difficult to treat. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) targeted to the primary motor cortex (M1) can alleviate the condition, but not all patients respond. We aimed to assess a promising alternative rTMS target, the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2), for CPSP treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled three-arm crossover trial assessed navigated rTMS (nrTMS) targeted to M1 and S2 (10 sessions, 5050 pulses per session at 10 Hz). Participants were evaluated for pain, depression, anxiety, health-related quality of life, upper limb function, and three plasticity-related gene polymorphisms including Dopamine D2 Receptor (DRD2). We monitored pain intensity and interference before and during stimulations and at one month. A conditioned pain modulation test was performed using the cold pressor test. This assessed the efficacy of the descending inhibitory system, which may transmit TMS effects in pain control.

RESULTS

We prescreened 73 patients, screened 29, and included 21, of whom 17 completed the trial. NrTMS targeted to S2 resulted in long-term (from baseline to one-month follow-up) pain intensity reduction of ≥30% in 18% (3/17) of participants. All stimulations showed a short-term effect on pain (17-20% pain relief), with no difference between M1, S2, or sham stimulations, indicating a strong placebo effect. Only nrTMS targeted to S2 resulted in a significant long-term pain intensity reduction (15% pain relief). The cold pressor test reduced CPSP pain intensity significantly (p = 0.001), indicating functioning descending inhibitory controls. The homozygous DRD2 T/T genotype is associated with the M1 stimulation response.

CONCLUSIONS

S2 is a promising nrTMS target in the treatment of CPSP. The DRD2 T/T genotype might be a biomarker for M1 nrTMS response, but this needs confirmation from a larger study.

Efficacy and tolerability in patients with chronic facial pain of two consecutive treatment periods of rTMS applied over the facial motor cortex, using protocols differing in stimulation frequency, duration, and train pattern

OBJECTIVE

We conducted an open-label cross-over study assessing the global effect of two high-frequency protocols of electric-field navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) targeted to functional facial motor cortex and comparing their efficacy and tolerability in patients with chronic facial pain. Outcome predictors were also assessed.

METHODS

We randomized twenty consecutive patients with chronic facial pain (post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathic pain, n=14; persistent idiopathic facial pain, n=4; secondary trigeminal neuralgia, n=2) to receive two distinct 5-day rTMS interventions (10Hz, 2400 pulses and 20Hz, 3600 pulses) separated by six weeks. The target area was assessed by mapping of lower face representation. The primary endpoint was the change in weekly mean of pain intensity (numeric rating scale, NRS) between the baseline and therapy week (1^st week), and follow-up weeks (2^nd and 3^rd weeks) for each rTMS intervention. Response was defined using a combination scale including the patient's global impression of change and continuance with maintenance treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, pain intensity NRS decreased from 7.4 at baseline to 5.9 ten weeks later, after the second rTMS intervention (p=0.009). The repetition of the treatment had a significant effect (F=4.983, p=0.043) indicating that the NRS scores are lower during the second four weeks period. Eight (40%) patients were responders, 4 (20%) exhibited a modest effect, 4 (20%) displayed no effect, and 4 (20%) experienced worsening of pain. High disability and high pain intensity (>7) predicted a better outcome (p=0.043 and p=0.045). Female gender, shorter duration of pain and low Beck Anxiety Inventory scores showed a trend towards a better outcome (p=0.052, 0.060 and 0.055, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

High-frequency rTMS targeted to face M1 alleviates treatment resistant chronic facial pain. Repeated treatment improves the analgesic effect. A protocol with higher frequency (above 10Hz), longer session duration (more than 20 minutes) and higher number of pulses (above 2400 pulses/session) did not improve the outcome. The results support early consideration of rTMS.

Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on neuropathic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a chronic pain condition caused by lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a neuroregulatory tool that uses pulsed magnetic fields to modulate the cerebral cortex. This review aimed to ascertain the therapeutic effect of rTMS on NP and potential factors regulating the therapeutic effect of rTMS. Database search included Web of Science, Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 2021. Eligible studies included randomized controlled studies of the analgesic effects of rTMS in patients with NP. Thirty-eight studies were included. Random effect analysis showed effect sizes of -0.66 (95 % CI, -0.87 to -0.46), indicating that real rTMS was better than sham condition in reducing pain (P < 0.001). This comprehensive review indicated that stimulation frequency, intervention site, and location of lesion were important factors affecting the therapeutic effect. The findings of this study may guide clinical decisions and future research.

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

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

The efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation for chronic orofacial pain: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) have been described as promising alternatives to treat different pain syndromes. This study evaluated the effects of TMS and tDCS in the treatment of chronic orofacial pain, through a systematic review.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in major databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, BBO, Open Gray and CINAHL. The eligibility criteria comprised randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that applied TMS or tDCS to treat chronic orofacial pain. The variables analyzed were pain, functional limitation, quality of life, tolerance to treatment, somatosensory changes, and adverse effects. The risk of bias was assessed through the Cochrane Collaboration tool, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated through GRADE. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018090774).

RESULTS

The electronic search resulted in 636 studies. Thereafter, the eligibility criteria were applied and the duplicates removed, resulting in eight RCTs (four TMS and four tDCS). The findings of these studies suggest that rTMS applied to the Motor cortex (M1), the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) provide adequate orofacial pain relief. Two studies reported significant pain improvement with tDCS applied over M1 while the other two failed to demonstrate significant effects compared to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

rTMS, applied to M1, DLPFC or S2, is a promising approach for the treatment of chronic orofacial pain. Moreover, tDCS targeting M1 seems to be also effective in chronic orofacial pain treatment. The included studies used a wide variety of therapeutic protocols. In addition, most of them used small sample sizes, with a high risk of biases in their methodologies, thus producing a low quality of evidence. The results indicate that further research should be carried out with caution and with better-standardized therapeutic protocols.

Descending antinociception induced by secondary somatosensory cortex stimulation in experimental neuropathy: role of the medullospinal serotonergic pathway

Stimulation of the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) has attenuated pain in humans and inflammatory nociception in animals. Here we studied S2 stimulation-induced antinociception and its underlying mechanisms in an experimental animal model of neuropathy induced by spinal nerve ligation (SNL). Effect of S2 stimulation on heat-evoked limb withdrawal latency was assessed in lightly anesthetized rats that were divided into three groups based on prior surgery and monofilament testing before induction of anesthesia: 1) sham-operated group and 2) hypersensitive and 3) nonhypersensitive (mechanically) SNL groups. In a group of hypersensitive SNL animals, a 5-HT_1A receptor agonist was microinjected into the rostroventromedial medulla (RVM) to assess whether autoinhibition of serotonergic cell bodies blocks antinociception. Additionally, effect of S2 stimulation on pronociceptive ON-cells and antinociceptive OFF-cells in the RVM or nociceptive spinal wide dynamic range (WDR) neurons were assessed in anesthetized hypersensitive SNL animals. S2 stimulation induced antinociception in hypersensitive but not in nonhypersensitive SNL or sham-operated animals. Antinociception was prevented by a 5-HT_1A receptor agonist in the RVM. Antinociception was associated with decreased duration of heat-evoked response in RVM ON-cells. In spinal WDR neurons, heat-evoked discharge was delayed by S2 stimulation, and this antinociceptive effect was prevented by blocking spinal 5-HT_1A receptors. The results indicate that S2 stimulation suppresses nociception in SNL animals if SNL is associated with tactile allodynia-like hypersensitivity. In hypersensitive SNL animals, S2 stimulation induces antinociception mediated by medullospinal serotonergic pathways acting on the spinal 5-HT_1A receptor, and partly through reduction of the RVM ON-cell discharge.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Stimulation of S2 cortex, but not that of an adjacent cortical area, induced descending heat antinociception in rats with the spinal nerve ligation-induced model of neuropathy. Antinociception was bilateral, and it involved suppression of pronociceptive medullary cells and activation of serotonergic pathways that act on the spinal 5-HT_1A receptor. S2 stimulation failed to induce descending antinociceptive effect in sham-operated controls or in nerve-ligated animals that had not developed mechanical hypersensitivity.