A Case Report of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-Related Seizure in a Young Patient With Major Depressive Disorder Receiving Accelerated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in children and young people with psychiatric disorders: a systematic review

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has demonstrated benefits in adults with psychiatric disorders, but its clinical utility in children and young people (CYP) is unclear. This PRISMA systematic review used published and ongoing studies to examine the effects of rTMS on disorder-specific symptoms, mood and neurocognition in CYP with psychiatric disorders. We searched Medline via PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO via OVID, and Clinicaltrials.gov up to July 2023. Eligible studies involved multiple-session (i.e., treatment) rTMS in CYP (≤ 25 years-old) with psychiatric disorders. Two independent raters assessed the eligibility of studies and extracted data using a custom-built form. Out of 78 eligible studies (participant N = 1389), the majority (k = 54; 69%) reported an improvement in at least one outcome measure of disorder-specific core symptoms. Some studies (k = 21) examined rTMS effects on mood or neurocognition,: findings were largely positive. Overall, rTMS was well-tolerated with minimal side-effects. Of 17 ongoing or recently completed studies, many are sham-controlled RCTs with better blinding techniques and a larger estimated participant enrolment. Findings provide encouraging evidence for rTMS-related improvements in disorder-specific symptoms in CYP with different psychiatric disorders. However, in terms of both mood (for conditions other than depression) and neurocognitive outcomes, evidence is limited. Importantly, rTMS is well-tolerated and safe. Ongoing studies appear to be of improved methodological quality; however, future studies should broaden outcome measures to more comprehensively assess the effects of rTMS and develop guidance on dosage (i.e., treatment regimens).

Safety of noninvasive brain stimulation in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a promising method for altering cortical excitability with clinical implications. It has been increasingly used in children, especially in neurodevelopmental disorders. Yet, its safety and applications in the developing brain require further investigation. This review aims to provide an overview of the safety of commonly used NIBS techniques in children, including transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Safety data for other NIBS methods is not reported in this review.

RECENT FINDINGS

In line with studies from the last decade, findings in the last 2 years (2022-2023) support the safety of NIBS in children and adolescents within the currently applied protocols. Both tES and TMS are well tolerated, if safety rules, including exclusion criteria, are applied.

SUMMARY

We briefly discussed developmental aspects of stimulation parameters that need to be considered in the developing brain and provided an up-to-date overview of tES/TMS applications in children and adolescents. Overall, the safety profile of tES/TMS in children is good. For both the tES and TMS applications, epilepsy and active seizure disorder should be exclusion criteria to prevent potential seizures. Using child-sized earplugs is required for TMS applications. We lack large randomized double-blind trialsand longitudinal studies to establish the safety of NIBS in children.

VIDEO ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/YCO/A78 .

The use of noninvasive brain stimulation techniques in autism spectrum disorder

Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), have recently emerged as alternative, nonpharmacological interventions for a variety of psychiatric, neurological, and neurodevelopmental conditions. NIBS is beginning to be applied in both research and clinical settings for the treatment of core and associated symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) including social communication deficits, restricted and repetitive behaviors, irritability, hyperactivity, depression and impairments in executive functioning and sensorimotor integration. Though there is much promise for these targeted device-based interventions, in other disorders (including adult major depressive disorder (MDD) and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) where rTMS is FDA cleared), data on the safety and efficacy of these interventions in individuals with ASD is limited especially in younger children when neurodevelopmental interventions typically begin. Most studies are open-label, small scale, and/or focused on a restricted subgroup of individuals with ASD. There is a need for larger, randomized controlled trials that incorporate neuroimaging in order to develop predictive biomarkers of treatment response and optimize treatment parameters. We contend that until such studies are conducted, we do not have adequate estimates of the safety and efficacy of NIBS interventions in children across the spectrum. Thus, broad off-label use of these techniques in this population is not supported by currently available evidence. Here we discuss the existing data on the use of NIBS to treat symptoms related to ASD and discuss future directions for the field.

A transdiagnostic review of safety, efficacy, and parameter space in accelerated transcranial magnetic stimulation

BACKGROUND

Accelerated transcranial magnetic stimulation (aTMS) is an emerging delivery schedule of repetitive TMS (rTMS). TMS is "accelerated" by applying two or more stimulation sessions within a day. This three-part review comprehensively reports the safety/tolerability, efficacy, and stimulation parameters affecting response across disorders.

METHODS

We used the PubMed database to identify studies administering aTMS, which we defined as applying at least two rTMS sessions within one day.

RESULTS

Our targeted literature search identified 85 aTMS studies across 18 diagnostic and healthy control groups published from July 2001 to June 2022. Excluding overlapping populations, 63 studies delivered 43,873 aTMS sessions using low frequency, high frequency, and theta burst stimulation in 1543 participants. Regarding safety, aTMS studies had similar seizure and side effect incidence rates to those reported for once daily rTMS. One seizure was reported from aTMS (0.0023% of aTMS sessions, compared with 0.0075% in once daily rTMS). The most common side effects were acute headache (28.4%), fatigue (8.6%), and scalp discomfort (8.3%), with all others under 5%. We evaluated aTMS efficacy in 23 depression studies (the condition with the most studies), finding an average response rate of 42.4% and remission rate of 28.4% (range = 0-90.5% for both). Regarding parameters, aTMS studies ranged from 2 to 10 sessions per day over 2-30 treatment days, 10-640 min between sessions, and a total of 9-104 total accelerated TMS sessions per participant (including tapering sessions). Qualitatively, response rate tends to be higher with an increasing number of sessions per day, total sessions, and total pulses.

DISCUSSION

The literature to date suggests that aTMS is safe and well-tolerated across conditions. Taken together, these early studies suggest potential effectiveness even in highly treatment refractory conditions with the added potential to reduce patient burden while also expediting response time. Future studies are warranted to systematically investigate how key aTMS parameters affect treatment outcome and durability.

Safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation in unipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To study the safety and patients' tolerance of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the major depressive disorder population.

METHODS

Our study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched the literature published before April 30th, 2021 and performed a random-effects meta-analyses which included drop-out due to adverse events, serious adverse events and other non-serious adverse events as primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 53 randomized sham-controlled trials with 3,273 participants were included. There was no increased risk of drop-out due to an adverse event (active TMS intervention group=3.3%, sham TMS intervention group=2.3%, odds ratio = 1.30, 95% CI= 0.78-2.16, P = 0.31) or a serious adverse event (active TMS intervention group=0.9%, sham TMS intervention group=1.5%, odds ratio = 0.67, 95% CI= 0.29-1.55, P = 0.35). Our findings suggest that TMS intervention may significantly increase the risk of non-serious adverse events including: headaches (active TMS intervention group=22.6%, sham TMS intervention group=16.2%, odds ratio = 1.48, 95% CI= 1.15-1.91, P = 0.002), discomfort (active TMS intervention group=10.9%, sham TMS intervention group=5.0%, odds ratio 1.98, 95% CI= 1.22-3.21, P = 0.006) and pain (active TMS intervention group=23.8%, sham TMS intervention group=5.2%, odds ratio= 8.09, 95% CI= 4.71-13.90, P < 0.001) at the stimulation site, but these non-serious events were mostly mild and transient after TMS treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide evidence for the safety and patients' tolerance of transcranial magnetic stimulation technique as an alternative monotherapy or as an add-on treatment for major depressive disorder.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Adolescent Major Depressive Disorder: A Focus on Neurodevelopment

Adolescent depression is a potentially lethal condition and a leading cause of disability for this age group. There is an urgent need for novel efficacious treatments since half of adolescents with depression fail to respond to current therapies and up to 70% of those who respond will relapse within 5 years. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has emerged as a promising treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults who do not respond to pharmacological or behavioral interventions. In contrast, rTMS has not demonstrated the same degree of efficacy in adolescent MDD. We argue that this is due, in part, to conceptual and methodological shortcomings in the existing literature. In our review, we first provide a neurodevelopmentally focused overview of adolescent depression. We then summarize the rTMS literature in adult and adolescent MDD focusing on both the putative mechanisms of action and neurodevelopmental factors that may influence efficacy in adolescents. We then identify limitations in the existing adolescent MDD rTMS literature and propose specific parameters and approaches that may be used to optimize efficacy in this uniquely vulnerable age group. Specifically, we suggest ways in which future studies reduce clinical and neural heterogeneity, optimize neuronavigation by drawing from functional brain imaging, apply current knowledge of rTMS parameters and neurodevelopment, and employ an experimental therapeutics platform to identify neural targets and biomarkers for response. We conclude that rTMS is worthy of further investigation. Furthermore, we suggest that following these recommendations in future studies will offer a more rigorous test of rTMS as an effective treatment for adolescent depression.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) Safety with Respect to Seizures: A Literature Review

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is an increasingly popular FDA-approved treatment for resistant depression, migraines, and OCD. Research is also underway for its use in various other psychiatric and medical disorders. Although rare, seizures are a potential adverse event of TMS treatment. In this article, we discuss TMS-related seizures with the various coils used to deliver TMS, the risk factors associated with seizures, the differential diagnosis of its presentations, the effects of sleep deprivation and alcohol use on seizures, as well as seizure risks with protocols for traditional TMS, theta-burst stimulation, and accelerated TMS. A discussion is presented comparing the potential risk of seizures with various psychotropic medications versus TMS. Included are case reports of TMS seizures in the child/adolescent patient, bipolar disorder patients, patients with a history of a traumatic brain injury, and those with epilepsy. Reports are also shared on TMS use without seizures in patients with a history of head injuries and TMS's continued use if patients have a seizure during their TMS treatment. Findings generated in this review suggest the following. Seizures, if present, are usually self-limiting. Most treatment recommendations for TMS-related seizures are supportive in nature. The risk of TMS-related seizures is <1% overall. TMS has successfully been used in patients with epilepsy, traumatic brain injuries, and those with a prior TMS-related seizure. The rate of TMS-related seizures is comparable to that of most psychotropic medications. While having a seizure is a rare but serious adverse effect of TMS, the benefits of treating refractory depression with TMS may outweigh the risk of suicidal ideation and other significant complications of depression.