Safety, Tolerability, and Nocebo Phenomena During Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists professional practice guidelines for the administration of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance for the optimal administration of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, based on scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus.

METHODS

Articles and information were sourced from existing guidelines and published literature. The findings were then formulated into consensus-based recommendations and guidance by the authors. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous successive consultation within the RANZCP, involving the Section of ECT and Neurostimulation (SEN) Committee, its broader membership and expert committees.

RESULTS

The RANZCP professional practice guidelines (PPG) for the administration of rTMS provide up-to-date advice regarding the use of rTMS in clinical practice. The guidelines are intended for use by psychiatrists and non-psychiatrists engaged in the administration of rTMS to facilitate best practice to optimise outcomes for patients. The guidelines strive to find the appropriate balance between promoting best evidence-based practice and acknowledging that evidence for rTMS use is a continually evolving.

CONCLUSION

The guidelines provide up-to-date advice for psychiatrists and non-psychiatrists to promote optimal standards of rTMS practice.

Efficacy and safety of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the prevention or treatment of migraine by conducting a pooled analysis of relevant randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, OVID, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing high-frequency rTMS and sham stimulation for the prevention or treatment of migraine. A meta-analysis of relevant outcome measures was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs with a total of 384 patients were included. A total of 23 patients dropped out, and thus, 361 patients were ultimately included for analysis. The high-frequency rTMS group had a lower frequency of attacks than the sham group (MD = - 5.10; 95% CI: - 8.10, - 2.09; P = 0.0009). The rTMS group has less intense headaches than the sham group (SMD = - 0.74; 95% CI - 1.04, - 0.44; P < 0.00001). High-frequency rTMS improved patient disability (SMD = - 0.45; 95% CI - 0.75, - 0.16; P = 0.003). High-frequency rTMS led to no advantage in reducing the number of abortive medications (MD = - 1.10; 95% CI - 3.28, 1.08; P = 0.32), but it increased the occurrence of adverse events (RR = 1.69; 95% CI 1.09, 2.64; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

High-frequency rTMS reduces the frequency of attacks and headache intensity in migraine patients and improves the patient's disability, but it also increases adverse events.

Risk factors associated with nocebo effects: A review of reviews

Objective

This meta-review aims to identify and categorize the risk factors that are associated with nocebo effects. The nocebo effect can exert a negative impact on treatment outcomes and have detrimental outcomes on health. Learning more about its potential predictors and risk factors is a crucial step to mitigating it.

Methods

Literature review studies about the risk factors for nocebo effects were searched through five databases (PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Embase) and through grey literature. Methodological validity and risk of bias were assessed. We conducted a thematic analysis of the results of the forty-three included reviews.

Results

We identified nine categories of risk factors: prior expectations and learning; socio-demographic characteristics; personality and individual differences; neurodegenerative conditions; inflammatory conditions; communication of information and patient-physician relationship; drug characteristics; setting; and self-awareness. We also highlighted the main biochemical and neurophysiological mechanisms underlying nocebo effects.

Conclusions

Nocebo effects arise from expectations of adverse symptoms, particularly when triggered by previous negative experiences. A trusting relationship with the treating physician and clear, tailored treatment instructions can act as protective factors against a nocebo effect. Clinical implications are discussed.

Should rTMS be considered a first-line treatment for major depressive episodes in adults?

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is an epidemic with rising social, economic, and political costs. In a patient whose major depressive episode (MDE) persists through an adequate antidepressant trial, insurance companies often cover alternative treatments which may include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). RTMS is an FDA-cleared neuromodulation technique for TRD which is safe, efficacious, noninvasive, and well-tolerated. Recent developments in the optimization of rTMS algorithms and targeting have increased the efficacy of rTMS in treating depression, improved the clinical convenience of these treatments, and decreased the cost of a course of rTMS. In this opinion paper, we make a case for why conventional FDA-cleared rTMS should be considered as a first-line treatment for all adult MDEs. RTMS is compared to other first-line treatments including psychotherapy and SSRIs. These observations suggest that rTMS has similar efficacy, fewer side-effects, lower risk of serious adverse events, comparable compliance, the potential for more rapid relief, and cost-effectiveness. This suggestion, however, would be strengthened by further research with an emphasis on treatment-naive subjects in their first depressive episode, and trials directly contrasting rTMS with SSRIs or psychotherapy.

Nocebo effects and influencing factors in the randomized clinical trials of chronic constipation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nocebo effects are unavoidable in randomized clinical trials. We aimed to assess the magnitude of nocebo effects and explore the influencing factors in chronic constipation.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to July 2022. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating interventions in chronic constipation were included. We conducted a random effects meta-analysis of the proportion of adverse events (AEs) in placebo-treated participants and evaluated the effect of trial characteristics on nocebo effects.

KEY RESULTS

We identified 20,204 studies from the databases, of which 61 were included in the final analysis. The pooled placebo AE rate was 30.41%, and AE-related withdrawal rate was 1.53%. The most commonly reported AEs were headache (5.67%), diarrhea (4.45%), abdominal pain (3.98%), nasopharyngitis (3.39%), nausea (3.36%), and flatulence (2.95%). The placebo AE rate was lower in trials conducted in Asia compared to those in Europe, North America, and international trials. It was also lower in trials diagnosed by Rome III compared to clinician's opinion and Rome II. Additionally, the placebo AE rate was lower in single-center trials compared to multicenter trials, lower in 5-8 weeks therapy compared to 9-12 weeks therapy, lower in participants with FC compared to those with IBS-C and CC, lower in trials with 2 arms compared to 3 arms, and higher in trials with prokinetic drugs compared to secretagogues and laxatives.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

The placebo AE rate was 30.41% in patients with chronic constipation. Based on our findings, we recommend that researchers take the nocebo effects into consideration when designing and conducting clinical trials and adopt specific measures to mitigate the negative influence of nocebo effects.

A Critical Review of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation Technologies in Alzheimer's Dementia and Primary Progressive Aphasia

Multiple pharmacologic agents now have been approved in the United States and other countries as treatment to slow disease and clinical progression for Alzheimer's disease. Given these treatments have not been proven to lessen the cognitive deficits already manifested in the Alzheimer's Clinical Syndrome (ACS), and none are aimed for another debilitating dementia syndrome identified as primary progressive aphasia (PPA), there is an urgent need for new, safe, tolerable, and efficacious treatments to mitigate the cognitive deficits experienced in ACS and PPA. Noninvasive brain stimulation has shown promise for enhancing cognitive functioning, and there has been interest in its potential therapeutic value in ACS and PPA. This review critically examines the evidence of five technologies in ACS and PPA: transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS). Many randomized controlled trials of tDCS and rTMS report positive treatment effects on cognition in ACS and PPA that persist out to at least 8 weeks, whereas there are few trials for tACS and none for tRNS and nVNS. However, most positive trials did not identify clinically meaningful changes, underscoring that clinical efficacy has yet to be established in ACS and PPA. Much is still to be learned about noninvasive brain stimulation in ACS and PPA, and shifting the focus to prioritize clinical significance in addition to statistical significance in trials could yield greater success in understanding its potential cognitive effects and optimal parameters.

Behavioral Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Disorders of Consciousness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Traumatic brain injury, cardiac arrest, intracerebral hemorrhage, and ischemic stroke may cause disorders of consciousness (DoC). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been used to promote the recovery of disorders of consciousness (DoC) patients. In this meta-analysis, we examined whether rTMS can relieve DoC patient symptoms. We searched through journal articles indexed in PubMed, the Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library until 20 April 2023. We assessed whether studies used rTMS as an intervention and reported the pre- and post-rTMS coma recovery scale-revised (CRS-R) scores. A total of 207 patients from seven trials were included. rTMS significantly improved the recovery degree of patients; the weighted mean difference (WMD) of the change in the CRS-R score was 1.89 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.39-2.39; p < 0.00001) in comparison with controls. The subgroup analysis showed a significant improvement in CRS-R scores in rTMS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (WMD = 2.24; 95% CI: 1.55-2.92; p < 0.00001; I2 = 31%) and the primary motor cortex (WMD = 1.63; 95% CI: 0.69-2.57; p = 0.0007; I2 = 14%). Twenty-hertz rTMS significantly improved CRS-R scores in patients with DoC (WMD = 1.61; 95% CI: 0.39-2.83; p = 0.010; I2 = 31%). Furthermore, CRS-R scores in rTMS over 20 sessions significantly improved (WMD = 1.75; 95% CI: 0.95-2.55; p < 0.0001; I2 = 12%). rTMS improved the symptoms of DoC patients; however, the available evidence remains limited and inadequate.

Treatment of depression and borderline personality disorder with 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the orbitofrontal cortex - A pilot study

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterised by impairments in emotional regulation, impulse control and interpersonal interaction. Comorbid depression is common. The orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) plays a crucial role in the biological substrate of BPD. We investigated the effects of 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) targeting the OFC on depressive symptoms and symptoms of BPD in 15 patients suffering from both conditions to assess feasibility and effectiveness. Target treatment intensity was 120% of resting motor threshold (RMT) and intended duration four weeks. Treatment improved both symptoms of depression as measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and of BPD as measured by Borderline Symptom List-23 and Barratt Impulsivity Scale. Drop-out rates were high with 7/15 patients not completing the full course of rTMS, but only two drop-outs were related to treatment. Only a minority of patients tolerated target treatment intensity. Despite the limitations, the results suggest efficacy of treatment and welcome further research.

Tolerability of transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in children

OBJECTIVE

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a viable non-invasive method for mapping language networks. Little is known about the tolerability of transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in children.

METHODS

Children aged 5-18 years underwent bilateral language mapping using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to target 33 sites/hemisphere. Stimulation was delivered at 5 Hz, in 1-2 second bursts, during visual naming and auditory verb generation. Pain unpleasantness and pain intensity were assessed using an unpleasantness visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

49 participants tolerated motor mapping and had repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. 35/49 (71%) completed visual naming and 26/49 (53%) completed both visual naming and verb generation. Mean electrical field per participant was 115 V/m. Young age and lower language ability were associated with lower completion. Visual analogue scale scores were significantly higher (6.1 vs. 2.8) in participants who withdrew early compared to those who completed at least visual naming.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain measured by VAS was a major contributor to early withdrawal. However, a complete bilateral map was obtained with one paradigm in 71% of participants. Future studies designed to reduce pain during repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over language cortex will boost viability.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study represents the first attempt to characterize tolerability of bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation language mapping in healthy children.

Nocebo response intensity and influencing factors in the randomized clinical trials of functional dyspepsia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

In this study we aimed to evaluate the nocebo response rate in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD) and to explore its influencing factors.

METHODS

A literature search of the EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for all articles published up to March 2021. Randomized, parallel-designed, placebo-controlled trials on pharmacological interventions for patients with FD were included. A meta-analysis that utilized random effects to analyze the incidence of adverse events (AEs) among participants who were given placebo was conducted, and the correlation between trial characteristics and the magnitude of the nocebo response rate was analyzed.

RESULTS

Altogether, 27 studies including 1866 paitents were deemed eligible and included in the analysis. The total nocebo response rate was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI] 18%-33%). The most frequently reported AEs included nasopharyngitis (9%), constipation (6%), headache (5%), and diarrhea (3%). There were significant differences in nocebo response rates among studies conducted in different country or region, treatment duration, types of medication, sponsorship and different versions of the Rome criteria used for FD diagnosis. While number of centers engaged in the study, types of FD diagnosis and dosing frequency were not significantly associated with the nocebo response rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with FD exhibit notable nocebo response strength in clinical trials. The researchers should adopt a more careful approach when analyzing the relationships between AEs and interventions in such trials.

Functional Activity in the Effect of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Therapy for Patients with Depression: A Meta-Analysis

Depression is a long-lasting mental disorder that affects more than 264 million people worldwide. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be a safe and effective choice for the treatment of depression. Functional neuroimaging provides unique insights into the neuropsychiatric effects of antidepressant TMS. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the functional activity of brain regions caused by TMS for depression. A literature search was conducted from inception to 5 January 2022. Studies were then selected according to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Activation likelihood estimation was applied to analyze functional activation. Five articles were ultimately included after selection. The main analysis results indicated that TMS treatment for depression can alter the activity in the right precentral gyrus, right posterior cingulate, left inferior frontal gyrus and left middle frontal gyrus. In resting-state studies, increased activation was shown in the right precentral gyrus, right posterior cingulate, left inferior frontal gyrus and left superior frontal gyrus associated with TMS treatment. In task-related studies, clusters in the right middle frontal gyrus, left sub-gyrus, left middle frontal gyrus and left posterior cingulate were hyperactivated post-treatment. Our study offers an overview of brain activity changes in patients with depression after TMS treatment.

Revisiting the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression, again

Following on from the publication of the Royal Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry Mood Disorder Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020) and criticisms of how these aberrantly addressed repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment of depression, questions have continued to be raised in the journal about this treatment by a small group of authors, whose views we contend do not reflect the broad acceptance of this treatment nationally and internationally. In fact, the evidence supporting the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression is unambiguous and substantial, consisting of an extensive series of clinical trials supported by multiple meta-analyses, network meta-analysis and umbrella reviews. Importantly, the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression has also been subject to a series of health economic analyses. These indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a cost-effective therapy and have been used in some jurisdictions, including Australia, in support of public funding. An argument has been made that offering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment may delay potentially effective pharmacotherapy. In fact, there is considerably greater danger of the opposite happening. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is as, if not more effective, than antidepressant medication after two unsuccessful medication trials and should be a consideration for all patients under these circumstances where available. There is no meaningful ongoing debate about the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression - it is a safe, effective and cost-effective treatment.

The evidence is in: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is an effective, safe and well-tolerated treatment for patients with major depressive disorder

Despite more than 25 years of research establishing the antidepressant efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, there remains uncertainty about the depth and breadth of this evidence base, resulting in confusion as to where repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation fits in the therapeutic armamentarium in the management of patients with mood disorders. The purpose of this article is to provide a concise description of the evidence base supporting the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the context of the stages of research that typically accompanies the development of evidence for a new therapy. The antidepressant efficacy for the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of depression has been established through a relatively traditional pathway beginning with small case series, progressing to single-site clinical trials and then to larger multisite randomised double-blind controlled trials. Antidepressant effects have been confirmed in numerous meta-analyses followed more recently by large network meta-analysis and umbrella reviews, with evidence that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation may have greater efficacy than alternatives for patients with treatment-resistant depression. Finally, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation has been shown to produce meaningful response and remission rates in real-world samples of greater than 5000 patients. The evidence for the antidepressant efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy is overwhelming, and it should be considered a routine part of clinical care wherever available.

Using Remotely Supervised At-Home TES for Enhancing Mental Resilience

We are in the midst of a mental health crisis with major depressive disorder being the most prevalent among mental health disorders and up to 30% of patients not responding to first-line treatments. Noninvasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) techniques have proven to be effective in treating depression. However, there is a fundamental problem of scale. Currently, any type of NIBS treatment requires patients to repeatedly visit a clinic to receive brain stimulation by trained personnel. This is an often-insurmountable barrier to both patients and healthcare providers in terms of time and cost. In this perspective, we assess to what extent Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (TES) might be administered with remote supervision in order to address this scaling problem and enable neuroenhancement of mental resilience at home. Social, ethical, and technical challenges relating to hardware- and software-based solutions are discussed alongside the risks of stimulation under- or over-use. Solutions to provide users with a safe and transparent ongoing assessment of aptitude, tolerability, compliance, and/or misuse are proposed, including standardized training, eligibility screening, as well as compliance and side effects monitoring. Looking into the future, such neuroenhancement could be linked to prevention systems which combine home-use TES with digital sensor and mental monitoring technology to index decline in mental wellbeing and avoid relapse. Despite the described social, ethical legal, and technical challenges, the combination of remotely supervised, at-home TES setups with dedicated artificial intelligence systems could be a powerful weapon to combat the mental health crisis by bringing personalized medicine into people’s homes.

Brain stimulation and other biological non-pharmacological interventions in mental disorders: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

The degree of efficacy, safety, quality, and certainty of meta-analytic evidence of biological non-pharmacological treatments in mental disorders is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted an umbrella review (PubMed/Cochrane Library/PsycINFO-04-Jul-2021, PROSPERO/CRD42020158827) for meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), electro-convulsive therapy (ECT), and others. Co-primary outcomes were standardized mean differences (SMD) of disease-specific symptoms, and acceptability (for all-cause discontinuation). Evidence was assessed with AMSTAR/AMSTAR-Content/GRADE.

RESULTS

We selected 102 meta-analyses. Effective interventions compared to sham were in depressive disorders: ECT (SMD=0.91/GRADE=moderate), TMS (SMD=0.51/GRADE=moderate), tDCS (SMD=0.46/GRADE=low), DBS (SMD=0.42/GRADE=very low), light therapy (SMD=0.41/GRADE=low); schizophrenia: ECT (SMD=0.88/GRADE=moderate), tDCS (SMD=0.45/GRADE=very low), TMS (prefrontal theta-burst, SMD=0.58/GRADE=low; left-temporoparietal, SMD=0.42/GRADE=low); substance use disorder: TMS (high frequency-dorsolateral-prefrontal-deep (SMD=1.16/GRADE=moderate), high frequency-left dorsolateral-prefrontal (SMD=0.77/GRADE=very low); OCD: DBS (SMD=0.89/GRADE=moderate), TMS (SMD=0.64/GRADE=very low); PTSD: TMS (SMD=0.46/GRADE=moderate); generalized anxiety disorder: TMS (SMD=0.68/GRADE=low); ADHD: tDCS (SMD=0.23/GRADE=moderate); autism: tDCS (SMD=0.97/GRADE=very low). No significant differences for acceptability emerged. Median AMSTAR/AMSTAR-Content was 8/2 (suggesting high-quality meta-analyses/low-quality RCTs), GRADE low.

DISCUSSION

Despite limited certainty, biological non-pharmacological interventions are effective and safe for numerous mental conditions. Results inform future research, and guidelines.

FUNDING

None.

The Management of Poststroke Thalamic Pain: Update in Clinical Practice

Poststroke thalamic pain (PS-TP), a type of central poststroke pain, has been challenged to improve the rehabilitation outcomes and quality of life after a stroke. It has been shown in 2.7–25% of stroke survivors; however, the treatment of PS-TP remains difficult, and in majority of them it often failed to manage the pain and hypersensitivity effectively, despite the different pharmacotherapies as well as invasive interventions. Central imbalance, central disinhibition, central sensitization, other thalamic adaptative changes, and local inflammatory responses have been considered as its possible pathogenesis. Allodynia and hyperalgesia, as well as the chronic sensitization of pain, are mainly targeted in the management of PS-TP. Commonly recommended first- and second-lines of pharmacological therapies, including traditional medications, e.g., antidepressants, anticonvulsants, opioid analgesics, and lamotrigine, were more effective than others. Nonpharmacological interventions, such as transcranial magnetic or direct current brain stimulations, vestibular caloric stimulation, epidural motor cortex stimulation, and deep brain stimulation, were effective in some cases/small-sized studies and can be recommended in the management of therapy-resistant PS-TP. Interestingly, the stimulation to other areas, e.g., the motor cortex, periventricular/periaqueductal gray matter, and thalamus/internal capsule, showed more effect than the stimulation to the thalamus alone. Further studies on brain or spinal stimulation are required for evidence.

Evidence and expert consensus based German guidelines for the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in depression

INTRODUCTION

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) offer a promising alternative to psychotherapeutic and pharmacological treatments for depression. This paper aims to present a practical guide for its clinical implementation based on evidence from the literature as well as on the experience of a group of leading German experts in the field.

METHODS

The current evidence base for the use of rTMS in depression was examined via review of the literature. From the evidence and from clinical experience, recommendations for the use of rTMS in clinical practice were derived. All members of the of the German Society for Brain Stimulation in Psychiatry and all members of the sections Clinical Brain Stimulation and Experimental Brain Stimulation of the German Society for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Mental Health were invited to participate in a poll on whether they consent with the recommendations.

FINDINGS

Among rTMS experts, a high consensus rate could be identified for clinical practice concerning the setting and the technical parameters of rTMS treatment in depression, indications and contra-indications, the relation of rTMS to other antidepressive treatment modalities and the frequency and management of side effects.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in the Treatment of Neurological Diseases

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) has widespread use in research and clinical application. For psychiatric applications, such as depression or OCD, repetitive TMS protocols (rTMS) are an established and globally applied treatment option. While promising, rTMS is not yet as common in treating neurological diseases, except for neurorehabilitation after (motor) stroke and neuropathic pain treatment. This may soon change. New clinical studies testing the potential of rTMS in various other neurological conditions appear at a rapid pace. This can prove challenging for both practitioners and clinical researchers. Although most of these neurological applications have not yet received the same level of scientific/empirical scrutiny as motor stroke and neuropathic pain, the results are encouraging, opening new doors for TMS in neurology. We here review the latest clinical evidence for rTMS in pioneering neurological applications including movement disorders, Alzheimer's disease/mild cognitive impairment, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, and disorders of consciousness.

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.

Corticocortical paired associative stimulation for treating motor dysfunction after stroke: study protocol for a randomised sham-controlled double-blind clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Stroke survivors can have a high disability rate with low quality of daily life, resulting in a heavy burden on family and society. Transcranial magnetic stimulation has been widely applied to brain injury repair, neurological disease treatment, cognition and emotion regulation and so on. However, there is still much to be desired in the theories of using these neuromodulation techniques to treat stroke-caused hemiplegia. It is generally recognised that synaptic plasticity is an important basis for functional repair after brain injury. This study protocol aims to examine the corticocortical paired associative stimulation (ccPAS) for inducing synaptic plasticity to rescue the paralysed after stroke.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The current study is designed as a 14-week double-blind randomised sham-controlled clinical trial, composed of 2-week intervention and 12-week follow-up. For the study, 42 patients who had a stroke aged 40-70 will be recruited, who are randomly assigned either to the ccPAS intervention group, or to the control group at a 1:1 ratio, hence an equal number each. In the intervention group, ccPAS is practised in conjunction with the conventional rehabilitation treatment, and in the control group, the conventional rehabilitation treatment is administered with sham stimulation. A total of 10 interventions will be made, 5 times a week for 2 weeks. The same assessors are supposed to evaluate the participants' motor function at four time points of the baseline (before 10 interventions), treatment ending (after 10 interventions), and two intervals of follow-up (1 and 3 months later, respectively). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity is used for the primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes include changes in the assessment of Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), electroencephalogram (EEG) and functional MRI data. The adverse events are to be recorded throughout the study.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Yueyang Hospital. All ethical work was performed in accordance with the Helsinki declaration. Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Study findings will be disseminated in the printed media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000036685.

Neurosurgery and neuromodulation for anorexia nervosa in the 21st century: a systematic review of treatment outcomes

As current psychosocial and pharmacological interventions show limited efficacy in the treatment of anorexia nervosa (AN), interest in the potential value of neurosurgical intervention and neuromodulation in managing severe and enduring illness has grown. We conducted a systematic review of 20 trials of neurosurgical and neuromodulatory treatments for AN, including neurosurgical ablation, deep brain stimulation (DBS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Overall, there is evidence to support the role of stereotactic ablation and DBS in the treatment of AN. In contrast, results for rTMS and tDCS have been modest and generally more mixed. Neurosurgical treatment may offer important new avenues for the treatment of AN. Additional randomized clinical trials with comparable patient populations will be needed, in which change in affective, cognitive, and perceptual symptom phenomena, and interrogation of targeted circuits, pre- and post-intervention, are carefully documented.

Psychiatric Applications of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an increasingly popular noninvasive brain stimulation modality. In TMS, a pulsed magnetic field is used to noninvasively stimulate a targeted brain region. Repeated stimulation produces lasting changes in brain activity via mechanisms of synaptic plasticity similar to long-term potentiation. Local application of TMS alters activity in distant, functionally connected brain regions, indicating that TMS modulates activity of cortical networks. TMS has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of major depressive disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and smoking cessation, and a growing evidence base supports its efficacy in the treatment of other neuropsychiatric conditions. TMS is rapidly becoming part of the standard of care for treatment-resistant depression, where it yields response rates of 40%-60%. TMS is generally safe and well tolerated; its most serious risk is seizure, which occurs very rarely. This review aims to familiarize practicing psychiatrists with basic principles of TMS, including target localization, commonly used treatment protocols and their outcomes, and safety and tolerability. Practical considerations, including evaluation and monitoring of patients undergoing TMS, device selection, treatment setting, and insurance reimbursement, are also reviewed.

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.

Hypomanic/manic switch after transcranial magnetic stimulation in mood disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nowadays there is an increasing use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) both in neurological and psychiatric fields. After Food and Drug Administration approval of TMS for the therapy of treatment-resistant depression, TMS has been widely used in the context of mood disorders (MD). However, growing reports regarding the possibility of developing hypomanic/manic switch (HMS) have generated concern regarding its use in MDs.

AIM

To investigate the actual risk of developing HMS due to TMS in the treatment of MD.

METHODS

We led our research on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science on March 22, 2020, in accordance to the PRISMA guidelines for systematic review. Only double blind/single blind studies, written in English and focused on the TMS treatment of MD, were included. A meta-analysis of repetitive TMS protocol studies including HMS was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. The assessment of Risk of Bias was done using Cochrane risk of bias tool. This protocol was registered on PROSPERO with the CRD42020175811 code.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included in our meta-analysis: Twenty-one double blind randomized controlled trials (RCT) and four single blind-RCT (no. of subjects involved in active stimulation = 576; no. of subjects involved in sham protocol = 487). The most frequently treated pathology was major depressive episode/major depressive disorder, followed by resistant depression, bipolar depression and other MD. The majority of the studies used a repetitive TMS protocol, and the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was the main target area. Side effects were reported in eight studies and HMS (described as greater energy, insomnia, irritability, anxiety, suicidal attempt) in four studies. When comparing active TMS vs sham treatment, the risk of developing HMS was not significantly different between conditions.

CONCLUSION

Applying the most usual protocols and the appropriate precautionary measures, TMS seems not to be related to HMS development.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as a potential treatment approach for cannabis use disorder

The expanding legalization of cannabis across the United States is associated with increases in cannabis use, and accordingly, an increase in the number and severity of individuals with cannabis use disorder (CUD). The lack of FDA-approved pharmacotherapies and modest efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions means that many of those who seek treatment for CUD relapse within the first few months. Consequently, there is a pressing need for innovative, evidence-based treatment development for CUD. Preliminary evidence suggests that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) may be a novel, non-invasive therapeutic neuromodulation tool for the treatment of a variety of substance use disorders (SUDs), including recently receiving FDA clearance (August 2020) for use as a smoking cessation aid in tobacco cigarette smokers. However, the potential of rTMS for CUD has not yet been reviewed. This paper provides a primer on therapeutic neuromodulation techniques for SUDs, with a particular focus on reviewing the current status of rTMS research in people who use cannabis. Lastly, future directions are proposed for rTMS treatment development in CUD, with suggestions for study design parameters and clinical endpoints based on current gold-standard practices for therapeutic neuromodulation research.

Corticospinal Excitability during a Perspective Taking Task as Measured by TMS-Induced Motor Evoked Potentials

Only by understanding the ability to take a third-person perspective can we begin to elucidate the neural processes responsible for one’s inimitable conscious experience. The current study examined differences in hemispheric laterality during a first-person perspective (1PP) and third-person perspective (3PP) taking task, using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Participants were asked to take either the 1PP or 3PP when identifying the number of spheres in a virtual scene. During this task, single-pulse TMS was delivered to the motor cortex of both the left and right hemispheres of 10 healthy volunteers. Measures of TMS-induced motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) of the contralateral abductor pollicis brevis (APB) were employed as an indicator of lateralized cortical activation. The data suggest that the right hemisphere is more important in discriminating between 1PP and 3PP. These data add a novel method for determining perspective taking and add to the literature supporting the role of the right hemisphere in meta representation.

Safety Review for Clinical Application of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Studies using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in healthy individuals and those with neuropsychiatric diseases have rapidly increased since the 1990s, due to the potential of rTMS to modulate the cortical excitability in the brain depending on the stimulation parameters; therefore, the safety considerations for rTMS use are expected to become more important. Wassermann published the first safety guidelines for rTMS from the consensus conference held in 1996, and Rossi and colleague then published the second safety guidelines from the multidisciplinary consensus meeting held in Siena, Italy in 2008, on behalf of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. More than 10 years after the second guidelines, the updated third safety guidelines were recently published in 2021. The general safety guidelines for conventional rTMS have not substantially changed. Because the most frequently used rTMS protocol is conventional (low- and high-frequency) rTMS in research and clinical settings, we focus on reviewing safety issues when applying conventional rTMS with a focal cortical stimulation coil. The following issues will be covered: 1) possible adverse events induced by rTMS; 2) checklists to screen for any precautions and risks before rTMS; 3) safety considerations for dosing conventional rTMS; and 4) safety considerations for using rTMS in stroke and traumatic brain injury.

The Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Anxiety in Patients With Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Post-hoc Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of neuropsychiatric disorders in young adults. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) has been shown to improve psychiatric symptoms in other neurologic disorders, such as focal epilepsy, Parkinson's disease, and fibromyalgia. However, the efficacy of rTMS as a treatment for anxiety in persons with TBI has never been investigated. This exploratory post-hoc analyzes the effects of rTMS on anxiety, depression and executive function in participants with moderate to severe chronic TBI. Methods: Thirty-six participants with moderate to severe TBI and anxiety symptoms were randomly assigned to an active or sham rTMS condition in a 1:1 ratio. A 10-session protocol was used with 10-Hz rTMS stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for 20 min each session, a total of 2,000 pulses were applied at each daily session (40 stimuli/train, 50 trains). Anxiety symptoms; depression and executive function were analyzed at baseline, after the last rTMS session, and 90 days post intervention. Results: Twenty-seven participants completed the entire protocol and were included in the post-hoc analysis. Statistical analysis showed no interaction of group and time (p > 0.05) on anxiety scores. Both groups improved depressive and executive functions over time, without time and group interaction (p _s < 0.05). No adverse effects were reported in either intervention group. Conclusion: rTMS did not improve anxiety symptoms following high frequency rTMS in persons with moderate to severe TBI. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02167971.

Effectiveness and tolerability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for preventive treatment of episodic migraine: a single-centre, randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled phase 2 trial (Magnet-EM)

Background

This is a phase II randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for preventive treatment of episodic migraine amongst migraine subjects.

Methods

Subjects age 18 to 60 years will undergo a baseline evaluation to establish the diagnosis of migraine based on the International Classification of Headache Disorder 3rd Edition (ICHD-3). Those who fulfil the ICHD-3 criteria for episodic migraine and compliant to the headache diary during a month run-in period will be enrolled. A total of 76 subjects will be randomised to receive either transcranial magnetic stimulation or sham stimulation for 5 sessions within 2 weeks duration. Follow-up sessions will be conducted monthly for three consecutive months. Prior to treatment, subjects will be required to fill up questionnaires and undergo few procedures such as electroencephalography, transcranial Doppler ultrasound and biochemical analysis for serum serotonin, serum calcitonin gene-related peptide and serum beta-endorphin. These procedures will be repeated at month 3 after receiving the last treatment. The primary outcome measure of this study is the difference in mean monthly migraine days at baseline and at months 1, 2 and 3 after treatment sessions.

Discussion

Following evidence from previous studies showing restoration of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) activation to almost normal level, the rTMS intervention will target left DLPFC in this study. An intermediate duration of treatment sessions is selected for this study. It is set to five treatment sessions given within 2 weeks duration.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03556722. Registered on 14 June 2018

An update on the clinical use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of depression

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an increasingly used treatment for patients with depression. The use of rTMS in depression is supported by over 20 years of clinical trials. There has been a significant increase in knowledge around the use of rTMS in recent years.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper was to review the use of rTMS in depression to provide an update for rTMS practitioners and clinicians interested in the clinical use of this treatment.

METHODS

A targeted review of the literature around the use of rTMS treatment of depression with a specific focus on studies published in the last 3 years.

RESULTS

High-frequency rTMS applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is an effective treatment for acute episodes of major depressive disorder. There are several additional methods of rTMS delivery that are supported by clinical trials and meta-analyses but no substantive evidence that any one approach is any more effective than any other. rTMS is effective in unipolar depression and most likely bipolar depression. rTMS courses may be repeated in the management of depressive relapse but there is less evidence for the use of rTMS in the maintenance phase.

CONCLUSIONS

The science around the use of rTMS is rapidly evolving and there is a considerable need for practitioners to remain abreast of the current state of this literature and its implications for clinical practice. rTMS is an effective antidepressant treatment but its optimal use should be continually informed by knowledge of the state of the art.

Non-Pharmacological Management of Painful Peripheral Neuropathies: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) is defined as the neuropathic pain that arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease affecting the peripheral nervous system. PNP is associated with a remarkable disease burden, and there is an increasing demand for new therapies to be used in isolation or combination with currently available treatments. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence, derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of PNP.

METHODS

After a systematic Medline search, we identified 18 papers eligible to be included.

RESULTS

The currently best available evidence (level II of evidence) exist for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. In particular, spinal cord stimulation as adjuvant to conventional medical treatment can be effectively used for the management of patients with refractory pain. Similarly, adjuvant repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex is effective in reducing the overall pain intensity, whereas adjuvant static magnetic field therapy can lead to a significant decrease in exercise-induced pain. Weaker evidence (level III of evidence) exists for the use of acupuncture as a monotherapy and neurofeedback, either as an add-on or a monotherapy approach, for treatment of painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy CONCLUSIONS: Future RCTs should be conducted to shed more light in the use of non-pharmacological approaches in patients with PNP.

Prevalence and Management Challenges in Central Post-Stroke Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Introduction

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is defined as the neuropathic pain that arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a cerebrovascular event and is a result of central lesions of the somatosensory tract. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish the prevalence of CPSP, to describe its characteristics, and to discuss the associated management challenges.

Methods

After a systematic Medline search, we identified 69 papers eligible to be included.

Results

The pooled prevalence of CPSP in patients with stroke at any location was 11% (95% CI 7–18%), which can increase to more than 50% in the subgroups of patients with medullary or thalamic strokes. CPSP onset coincides with stroke occurrence in 26% of patients (95% CI 18–35%); CPSP manifests within a month since symptom onset in 31% of patients (95% CI 22–42%), and occurs between the first month and the first year in 41% of patients (95% CI 33.9–49.0%). CPSP develops more than 12 months after stroke onset in 5% of patients (95% CI 3–8%).

Conclusions

Clinicians should look for any evidence of central neuropathic pain for at least 12 months after stroke. Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions can be used for the management of CPSP. Lamotrigine has the strongest evidence (Level II of evidence, derived from small randomized controlled trials) for being effective in the management of CPSP. Future research should focus on well-designed trials of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions aiming to relief CPSP, which is a very common but often neglected pain syndrome.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-020-01388-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Neuromodulation of Gamma-Range Auditory Steady-State Responses: A Scoping Review of Brain Stimulation Studies

Neural oscillations represent a fundamental mechanism that enables coordinated action during normal brain functioning. Auditory steady-state responses (ASSRs) are used to test the ability to generate gamma-range activity. Different non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques have the potential to modulate neural activation patterns that are aberrant in a variety of neuropsychiatric disorders. Here, we summarize the current state of knowledge on how different methods of NIBS (transcranial altering current stimulation—tACS, transcranial direct current stimulation—tDCS, transcranial random noise stimulation—tRNS, paired associative stimulation—PAS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation—rTMS) affect the gamma-range ASSRs in both healthy and clinical populations. We show that the current research has been far from systematic and methodologically heterogeneous. Nevertheless, some brain stimulation techniques, especially tACS and rTMS show strong potential for further exploration. We outline the main findings and provide directions for further research into neuromodulation of ASSRs as a promising biomarker of different psychopathological conditions such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism.

Repetitive Magnetic Stimulation for the Management of Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Repetitive magnetic stimulation (rMS) is a safe and well-tolerated intervention. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is used for the treatment of depression and for the treatment and prevention of migraine. Over the last few years, several reports and randomised controlled studies of the use of rMS for the treatment of pain have been published. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the available literature regarding the use of rMS in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain.

METHODS

After a systematic Medline search we identified 12 papers eligible to be included in this review.

RESULTS

The majority of the studies were on patients with phantom limb pain, followed by radiculopathy, plexopathy, post-traumatic pain and peripheral neuropathy. The treatment protocols vary significantly from study to study and, therefore, pooling the results together is currently difficult. However, rMS has a definite immediate effect in pain relief which, in the majority of studies, is maintained for a few weeks.

CONCLUSION

rMS seems to be a promising intervention in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain. Further research is in the field is needed. Use of neuronavigation might increase the precision of stimulation and subsequently its effectiveness.

Nocebo effect in myasthenia gravis: systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials

Nocebo refers to the adverse events (AEs) experienced when taking a placebo drug and is believed to be a centrally mediated process. We sought to examine the AEs following placebo administration in Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) for Myasthenia Gravis (MG) patients. A systematic literature search was performed on Medline and Web of Science for RCTs for MG pharmacological treatments. We assessed the number of placebo-treated patients reporting at least one AE and the number of dropouts because of AEs. Data were extracted from six RCTs fulfilling the search criteria. Four out of five placebo-treated participants (80.1%) reported at least one AE and one in 40 (2.4%) discontinued placebo treatment because of AE. All patients participating in the MG trials reported similar AEs independent of the study arm to which they belonged (placebo or active treatment). This meta-analysis demonstrates a low nocebo dropout rate in MG compared to central nervous system disorders.

Nocebo in cerebellar ataxia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Nocebo, the negative counterpart of the placebo phenomenon results in the induction of adverse events (AEs) following the administration of an inert substance. Nocebo has been demonstrated to be associated with low treatment compliance in clinical trials, thus affecting treatment outcomes. This study sought to determine the prevalence of nocebo in cerebellar ataxia.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on Pubmed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for cerebellar ataxia treatments. The number of drug-related AEs and the number of withdrawals due to drug intolerance in the placebo group were statistically analysed.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 214 studies, of which 6 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Approximately 1 in 20 (4.8%) placebo-treated patients withdrew treatment due to AEs and approximately 1 in 7 (13.8%) placebo-treated participants reported at least one AE. Participants in cerebellar ataxia trials reported similar AEs across both treatment groups (active and placebo).

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that the nocebo effect in cerebellar ataxia is amongst the lowest in neurological diseases.