Randomized, proof-of-principle clinical trial of active transcranial magnetic stimulation in chronic migraine

Effect of different non-pharmacologic placebo treatments on migraine prevention: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Placebo control plays an important role in evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. Specifying differential effects of various placebo controls on migraine prevention would be essential in the explanation of preventive treatment for migraine and the indirect comparison between different prophylactic therapeutics.

OBJECTIVES

To access the impact of different non-pharmacologic placebo types on different outcomes in migraine patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, Embase, and Web of Science databases from the date of creation to June 19, 2023. Randomized controlled trials of migraine that included sham intervention of acupuncture or cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation (nVNS) or repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) or transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) were conducted. The primary outcome was the migraine days, and the secondary outcomes were the number of migraine attacks, headache days, headache frequency, and responder's rate. Placebo effects were assessed using five individual placebos for network meta-analysis, using mean differences to measure the relative effect of pair-wise comparisons between interventions.

RESULT

A total of 50 trials with 4880 subjects were included. Twenty-seven trials were evaluated for low risk of bias. The results of indirect comparisons show that sham rTMS and sham tDCS had optimal and similar effects in reducing migraine days; sham acupuncture has the greatest effect on reducing the number of migraine attacks and relieving headache frequency; sham rTMS had a highly significant advantage in reducing headache days compared with the other placebo controls.

CONCLUSION

Based on the network meta-analysis results, we found that sham acupuncture had the greatest effect on migraine prophylaxis. The strong placebo effect of sham acupuncture should be considered when assessing the therapeutic effect.

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.

Utility of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Chronic Daily Headache Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Management of chronic daily headaches (CDH) remains challenging due to the limited efficacy of standard prophylactic pharmacological measures. Several studies have reported that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can effectively treat chronic headaches. The objective was to determine the utility of rTMS for immediate post-treatment and sustained CDH prophylaxis.

RECENT FINDINGS

All procedures were conducted per PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched for controlled clinical trials that have tested the efficacy of rTMS on populations with CDH. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the 'meta' package in R to examine the post- vs. pre-rTMS changes in standardized headache intensity and frequency compared to sham-control conditions. Thirteen trials were included with a combined study population of N = 538 patients with CDH (rTMS, N = 284; Sham, N = 254). Patients exposed to rTMS had significantly reduced standardized CDH intensity and frequency in the immediate post-treatment period (Hedges' g = -1.16 [-1.89, -0.43], p = 0.002 and Δ = -5.07 [-10.05, -0.11], p = 0.045 respectively). However, these effects were sustained marginally in the follow-up period (Hedges' g = -0.43 [-0.76, -0.09], p = 0.012 and Δ = -3.33 [-5.52, -1.14], p = 0.003). Significant between-study heterogeneity was observed, at least partially driven by variations in rTMS protocols. Despite the observed clinically meaningful and statistically significant benefits in the immediate post-treatment period, the prophylactic effects of rTMS on CDH do not seem to sustain with discontinuation. Thus, the cost-effectiveness of the routine use of rTMS for CDH prophylaxis remains questionable.

REGISTRATION

Protocol preregistered in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021250100).

Novel ultrasound neuromodulation therapy with transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) in Parkinson's disease: a first retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcranial Pulse Stimulation (TPS) has been recently introduced as a novel ultrasound neuromodulation therapy with the potential to stimulate the human brain in a focal and targeted manner. Here, we present a first retrospective analysis of TPS as an add-on therapy for Parkinson's disease (PD), focusing on feasibility, safety, and clinical effects. We also discuss the placebo response in non-invasive brain stimulation studies as an important context.

METHODS

This retrospective clinical data analysis included 20 PD patients who received ten sessions of TPS intervention focused on the individual motor network. Safety evaluations were conducted throughout the intervention period. We analyzed changes in motor symptoms before and after TPS treatment using Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III (UPDRS-III).

RESULTS

We found significant improvement in UPDRS-III scores after treatment compared to baseline (pre-TPS: 16.70 ± 8.85, post-TPS: 12.95 ± 8.55; p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 1.38). Adverse events monitoring revealed no major side effects.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary findings suggest that TPS can further improve motor symptoms in PD patients already on optimized standard therapy. Findings have to be evaluated in context with the current literature on placebo effects.

The Efficacy of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) versus Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) on Migraine Headaches: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Non-pharmacologic prophylactic methods for chronic migraine have been developed, including the promising non-invasive techniques of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS). This study aimed to compare the efficacy of rTMS and tDCS on pain intensity, the impact of headaches on daily life, anxiety, and depression in migraine headaches patients.

Materials and Methods

This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 72 patients with migraine headaches, randomly allocated to the rTMS and tDCS groups. Participants received 3 and 12 sessions of stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), respectively. Follow-up measurements, including pain intensity, anxiety, depression, and impact on daily life, were performed one month after the last sessions. Analyses were done by IBM SPSS statistics version 26 software.

Results

Of 72 patients enrolled in the study, 19 were male (8 in the rTMS group and 11 in the tDCS group). There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between groups. During the follow-up visit, both groups showed a decrease in anxiety levels (P values = 0.005 and 0.015), while only the rTMS group displayed a significant improvement in depression (P value = 0.01). However, no statistically significant difference was found among the groups regarding changes in pain intensity, anxiety, and the impact of headaches on daily life (P values >0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that both rTMS and tDCS may be effective in reducing pain intensity and improving the impact of headaches on daily life and anxiety in patients with chronic migraine. However, significant improvement in depression was only observed in the rTMS group patients.

Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Quadripulse rTMS over the Visual Cortex: A Proof-of-Concept Study in Healthy Volunteers and Chronic Migraine Patients with Medication Overuse Headache

In chronic migraine with medication overuse (CM-MOH), sensitization of visual cortices is reflected by (i) increased amplitude of stimulus-evoked responses and (ii) habituation deficit during repetitive stimulation. Both abnormalities might be mitigated by inhibitory transcranial neurostimulation. Here, we tested an inhibitory quadripulse repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS-QPI) protocol to decrease durably visual cortex excitability in healthy subjects (HS) and explored its therapeutic potential in CM-MOH patients. Pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials (VEP) were used as biomarkers of effect and recorded before (T1), immediately after (T2), and 3 h after stimulation (T3). In HS, rTMS-QPI durably decreased the VEP 1st block amplitude (p < 0.05) and its habituation (p < 0.05). These changes were more pronounced for the P1N2 component that was modified already at T2 up to T3, while for N1P1 they were significant only at T3. An excitatory stimulation protocol (rTMS-QPE) tended to have an opposite effect, restricted to P1N2. In 12 CM-MOH patients, during a four-week treatment (2 sessions/week), rTMS-QPI significantly reduced monthly headache days (p < 0.01). In patients reversing from CM-MOH to episodic migraine (n = 6), VEP habituation significantly improved after treatment (p = 0.005). rTMS-QPI durably decreases visual cortex responsivity in healthy subjects. In a proof-of-concept study of CM-MOH patients, rTMS-QPI also has beneficial clinical and electrophysiological effects, but sham-controlled trials are needed.

Beyond trial-and-error: Individualizing therapeutic transcranial neuromodulation for chronic pain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to the motor cortex provides supplementary relief for some individuals with chronic pain who are refractory to pharmacological treatment. As rTMS slowly enters treatment guidelines for pain relief, its starts to be confronted with challenges long known to pharmacological approaches: efficacy at the group-level does not grant pain relief for a particular patient. In this review, we present and discuss a series of ongoing attempts to overcome this therapeutic challenge in a personalized medicine framework.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

Relevant scientific publications published in main databases such as PubMed and EMBASE from inception until March 2023 were systematically assessed, as well as a wide number of studies dedicated to the exploration of the mechanistic grounds of rTMS analgesic effects in humans, primates and rodents.

RESULTS

The main strategies reported to personalize cortical neuromodulation are: (i) the use of rTMS to predict individual response to implanted motor cortex stimulation; (ii) modifications of motor cortex stimulation patterns; (iii) stimulation of extra-motor targets; (iv) assessment of individual cortical networks and rhythms to personalize treatment; (v) deep sensory phenotyping; (vi) personalization of location, precision and intensity of motor rTMS. All approaches except (i) have so far low or moderate levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although current evidence for most strategies under study remains at best moderate, the multiple mechanisms set up by cortical stimulation are an advantage over single-target 'clean' drugs, as they can influence multiple pathophysiologic paths and offer multiple possibilities of individualization.

SIGNIFICANCE

Non-invasive neuromodulation is on the verge of personalised medicine. Strategies ranging from integration of detailed clinical phenotyping into treatment design to advanced patient neurophysiological characterisation are being actively explored and creating a framework for actual individualisation of care.

Neuromodulatory effects and reproducibility of the most widely used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is widely used in both research and clinical settings to modulate human brain function and behavior through the engagement of the mechanisms of plasticity. Based upon experiments using single-pulse TMS as a probe, the physiologic mechanism of these effects is often assumed to be via changes in cortical excitability, with 10 Hz rTMS increasing and 1 Hz rTMS decreasing the excitability of the stimulated region. However, the reliability and reproducibility of these rTMS protocols on cortical excitability across and within individual subjects, particularly in comparison to robust sham stimulation, have not been systematically examined.

OBJECTIVES

In a cohort of 28 subjects (39 ± 16 years), we report the first comprehensive study to (1) assess the neuromodulatory effects of traditional 1 Hz and 10 Hz rTMS on corticospinal excitability against both a robust sham control, and two other widely used patterned rTMS protocols (intermittent theta burst stimulation, iTBS; and continuous theta burst stimulation, cTBS), and (2) determine the reproducibility of all rTMS protocols across identical repeat sessions.

RESULTS

At the group level, neither 1 Hz nor 10 Hz rTMS significantly modulated corticospinal excitability. 1 Hz and 10 Hz rTMS were also not significantly different from sham and both TBS protocols. Reproducibility was poor for all rTMS protocols except for sham. Importantly, none of the real rTMS and TBS protocols demonstrated greater neuromodulatory effects or reproducibility after controlling for potential experimental factors including baseline corticospinal excitability, TMS coil deviation and the number of individual MEP trials.

CONCLUSIONS

These results call into question the effectiveness and reproducibility of widely used rTMS techniques for modulating corticospinal excitability, and suggest the need for a fundamental rethinking regarding the potential mechanisms by which rTMS affects brain function and behavior in humans.

Non-invasive brain stimulation treatments for migraine prophylaxis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Migraine is a major public health problem owing to its long disease duration and disease relapse. Non-invasive brain stimulation treatments were reported effective for the management of migraine, but the comparative effectiveness of three main NIBSs, rTMS, nVNS, and tDCS, has not been studied. We aimed to explore the relative efficacy of rTMS, tDCS, and nVNS in migraine prophylaxis by using network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

We searched OVID Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, and Web of Science from inception to 1 January 2022. Randomized controlled trials that reported the efficacy of rTMS, tDCS or nVNS in the prophylactic treatment of migraine were included. The primary outcome was monthly migraine frequency, and secondary outcomes were headache intensity and the impact of headaches on daily life. The relative effects of the treatments in contrast to the others were measured by using standard mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

We included 31 trials with 1659 participants. Fourteen trials were rated as low risk of bias. The results showed that tDCS (SMD - 1.58; 95%CI, - 2.38 to  - 0.79; P-score = 0.92) had the largest effect on migraine frequency when compared with sham interventions in reducing monthly migraine frequency, and tDCS had a larger effect than rTMS (SMD - 0.62; 95%CI, - 1.81 to 0.57) and nVNS (SMD - 1.39; 95%CI, - 3.27 to 0.49). tDCS had also the largest effect in reducing pain intensity when compared with sham intervention (SMD - 1.49; 95%CI, - 2.46 to  - 0.52) and rTMS (SMD - 0.48; 95%CI, - 2.06 to 1.09).

CONCLUSIONS

For the prophylactic treatment of migraine, tDCS was relatively more effective than rTMS and nVNS. Head-to-head comparison trials are needed to confirm the findings.

Effectiveness of High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in migraine measured by decrease in pain severity or attack frequency.

METHODS

A search at the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus. The risk of systematic bias was rated by using the Cochrane domain-based quality assessment tool. A random-effects model was used.

RESULTS

Of 434 identified records, 8 randomized control studies were included in the meta-synthesis. All have used a high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The risk of systematic bias was low. The difference between repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and control groups in frequency of migraine days per month was 8.1 (95% confidence interval = 4.8 - 11.4) days in favor of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Respectively, for intensity of migraine pain (scaled from 0 to 100), this difference was 13.6 (95% confidence interval = 5.3 - 21.8) points in favor of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. The heterogeneity was substantial with I2 = 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

In chronic migraine, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation seems to have positive effects on both migraine pain severity and attack frequency compared with sham stimulation. Although the effect on pain intensity was probably clinically insignificant, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation reduced pain frequency by 8 days per month on average.

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

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

High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation at dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for migraine prevention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over dorsolateral prefrontal cortex as a migraine prevention by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over dorsolateral prefrontal cortex as preventive migraine treatment remains debatable.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and BioMed Central databases were searched from their inception until December 2020. Randomised trials comparing high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over dorsolateral prefrontal cortex with sham for migraine prevention were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane guidelines. Headache days, pain intensity, acute medication intake, and disability were extracted as study outcomes and the mean difference with a random-effects model was used to determine the effect size.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis revealed that high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over dorsolateral prefrontal cortex significantly reduced acute medication intake (Mean Difference = 9.78, p = 0.02, 95%CI: 1.60, 17.96, p = 0.02) and functional disability (Mean Difference = 8.00, p < 0.05, 95%CI: 4.21, 11.79). However, no differences were found in headache days and pain intensity reduction, although there was a slight trend favouring high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

CONCLUSION

High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over dorsolateral prefrontal cortex may be effective in reducing acute medication intake and disability. However, more studies are needed to strengthen this preliminary evidence.

Effectiveness and acceptability of noninvasive brain and nerve stimulation techniques for migraine prophylaxis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Current pharmacologic prophylactic strategies for migraine have exhibited limited efficacy, with response rates as low as 40%-50%. In addition to the limited efficacy, the acceptability of those pharmacologic prophylactic strategies were unacceptable. Although noninvasive brain/nerve stimulation strategies may be effective, the evidence has been inconsistent. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare strategies of noninvasive brain/nerve stimulation for migraine prophylaxis with respect to their effectiveness and acceptability.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov , ClinicalKey, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched to date of June 4th, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patients with diagnosis of migraine, either episodic migraine or chronic migraine, were included. All NMA procedures were conducted under the frequentist model.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs were included (N = 1493; mean age = 38.2 years; 82.0% women). We determined that the high frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over C3 yielded the most decreased monthly migraine days among all the interventions [mean difference = - 8.70 days, 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs): - 14.45 to - 2.95 compared to sham/control groups]. Only alternating frequency (2/100 Hz) transcutaneous occipital nerve stimulation (tONS) over the Oz (RR = 0.36, 95%CIs: 0.16 to 0.82) yielded a significantly lower drop-out rate than the sham/control groups did.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study provided a new direction for the design of more methodologically robust and larger RCTs based on the findings of the potentially beneficial effect on migraine prophylaxis in participants with migraine by different noninvasive brain/nerve stimulation, especially the application of rTMS and tONS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42021252638. The current study had been approval by the Institutional Review Board of the Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center (TSGHIRB No. B-109-29).

Neuromodulation for Chronic Daily Headache

Purpose of Review

We reviewed the literature that explored the use of central and peripheral neuromodulation techniques for chronic daily headache (CDH) treatment.

Recent Findings

Although the more invasive deep brain stimulation (DBS) is effective in chronic cluster headache (CCH), it should be reserved for extremely difficult-to-treat patients. Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation has shown similar efficacy to DBS and is less risky in both CCH and chronic migraine (CM). Non-invasive transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation is a promising add-on treatment for CCH but not for CM. Transcutaneous external trigeminal nerve stimulation may be effective in treating CM; however, it has not yet been tested for cluster headache. Transcranial magnetic and electric stimulations have promising preventive effects against CM and CCH.

Summary

Although the precise mode of action of non-invasive neuromodulation techniques remains largely unknown and there is a paucity of controlled trials, they should be preferred to more invasive techniques for treating CDH.

Concurrent TMS-EEG to Reveal the Neuroplastic Changes in the Prefrontal and Insular Cortices in the Analgesic Effects of DLPFC-rTMS

The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is an important target for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to reduce pain. However, the analgesic efficacy of DLPFC-rTMS needs to be optimized, in which the mechanisms of action remain unclear. Concurrent TMS and electroencephalogram (TMS-EEG) is able to evaluate neuroplastic changes beyond the motor cortex. Using TMS-EEG, this study was designed to investigate the local and distributed neuroplastic changes associated with DLPFC analgesia. Thirty-four healthy adults received DLPFC or sham stimulation in a randomized, crossover design. In each session, participants underwent cold pain and TMS-EEG assessment both before and after 10-Hz rTMS. We provide novel findings that DLPFC analgesia is associated with a smaller N120 amplitude in the contralateral prefrontal cortex as well as with a larger N120 peak in the ipsilateral insular cortex. Furthermore, there was a strong negative correlation between N120 changes of these two regions whereby the amplitude changes of this dyad were associated with increased pain threshold. In addition, DLPFC stimulation enhanced coherence between the prefrontal and somatosensory cortices oscillating in the gamma frequency. Overall, our data present novel evidence on local and distributed neuroplastic changes associated with DLPFC analgesia.

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.

Sham-derived effects and the minimal reliability of theta burst stimulation

Theta-burst stimulation (TBS) is a patterned form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) that has been used to induce long-term modulation (plasticity) of corticospinal excitability in a drastically shorter duration protocol than conventional rTMS protocols. In this study we tested the reliability of the effects of two well defined TBS protocols, continuous TBS (cTBS) and intermittent TBS (iTBS), especially in relation to sham TBS, within and across the same 24 participants. All TBS protocols were repeated after approximately 1 month to assess the magnitude and reliability of the modulatory effects of each TBS protocol. Baseline and post-TBS changes in motor evoked potentials (MEP—measure of corticospinal excitability) amplitudes were compared across the cTBS, iTBS and sham TBS protocols and between the initial and retest visits. Overall, across participants, at the initial visit, iTBS facilitated MEPs as compared to baseline excitability, with sham eliciting the same effect. cTBS did not show a significant suppression of excitability compared to baseline MEPs at either visit, and even facilitated MEPs above baseline excitability at a single time point during the repeat visit. Otherwise, effects of TBS were generally diminished in the repeat visit, with iTBS and sham TBS replicating facilitation of MEPs above baseline excitability at similar time points. However, no protocol demonstrated consistent intra-individual modulation of corticospinal excitability upon retest. As the first study to test both iTBS and cTBS against sham TBS across repeat visits, our findings challenge the efficacy and reliability of TBS protocols and emphasize the importance of accounting for sham effects of TBS. Furthermore, given that therapeutic effects of TBS are hypothetically derived from consistent and repeated modulation of brain activity, the non-replicability of plasticity and sham effects call into question these basic mechanisms.

Increased migraine-free intervals with multifocal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

INTRODUCTION

Episodic migraine is a debilitating condition associated with vast impairments of health, daily living, and life quality. Several prophylactic treatments exist, having a moderate ratio of action related to side effects and therapy costs. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an evidence based therapy in several neuropsychiatric conditions, showing robust efficacy in alleviating specific symptoms. However, its efficacy in migraine disorders is unequivocal and might be tightly linked to the applied rTMS protocol. We hypothesized that multifocal rTMS paradigm could improve clinical outcomes in patients with episodic migraine by reducing the number of migraine days, frequency and intensity of migraine attacks, and improve the quality of life.

METHODS

We conducted an experimental, double-blind, randomized controlled study by applying a multifocal rTMS paradigm. Patients with episodic migraine with or without aura were enrolled in two centers from August 2018, to December 2019, and randomized to receive either real (n = 37) or sham (sham coil stimulation, n = 28) multifocal rTMS for six sessions over two weeks. Patients, physicians, and raters were blinded to the applied protocol. The experimental multifocal rTMS protocol included two components; first, swipe stimulation of 13 trains of 140 pulses/train, 67 Hz, 60% of RMT, and 2s intertrain interval and second, spot burst stimulation of 33 trains of 15 pulses/train, 67 Hz, 85% of RMT, and 8s intertrain interval. Reduction >50% from the baseline in migraine days (as primary outcome) and frequency and intensity of migraine attacks (as key secondary outcomes) over a 12-week period were assessed. To balance the baseline variables between the treatment arms, we applied the propensity score matching through the logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 65 randomized patients, sixty (age 39.7 ± 11.6; 52 females; real rTMS n = 33 and sham rTMS n = 27) completed the trial and five patients dropped out. Over 12 weeks, the responder's rate in the number of migraine days was significantly higher in the real rTMS compared to the sham group (42% vs. 26%, p < 0.05). The mean migraine days per month decreased from 7.6 to 4.3 days in the real rTMS group and from 6.2 to 4.3 days in the sham rTMS group, resulting in a difference with real vs. sham rTMS of -3.2 days (p < 0.05). Similarly, over the 12-week period, the responder's rate in the reduction of migraine attacks frequency was higher in the real rTMS compared to the sham group (42% vs 33%, p < 0.05). No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study shows compelling evidence in a double placebo-controlled trial that multifocal rTMS is an effective and well-tolerated preventive treatment in patients with episodic migraine.

High-frequency rTMS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on chronic and provoked pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-frequency rTMS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has demonstrated mixed effects on chronic and provoked pain.

OBJECTIVES/METHODS

In this study, a meta-analysis was conducted to characterise the potential analgesic effects of high-frequency rTMS over the DLPFC on both chronic and provoked pain.

RESULTS

A total of 626 studies were identified in a systematic search. Twenty-six eligible studies were included for the quantitative review, among which 17 modulated chronic pain and the remaining investigated the influence on provoked pain. The left side DLPFC was uniformly targeted in the chronic pain studies. While our data identified no overall effect of TMS across chronic pain conditions, there was a significant short-term analgesia in neuropathic pain conditions only (SMD = -0.87). In terms of long-lasting analgesia, there was an overall pain reduction in the midterm (SMD = -0.53, 24.6 days average) and long term (SMD = -0.63, 3 months average) post DLPFC stimulation, although these effects were not observed within specific chronic pain conditions. Surprisingly, the number of sessions was demonstrated to have no impact on rTMS analgesia. In the analysis of provoked pain, our data also indicated a significant analgesic effect following HF-rTMS over the DLPFC (SMD = -0.73). Importantly, we identified a publication bias in the studies of provoked pain but not for chronic pain conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our findings support that HF-DLPFC stimulation is able to induce an analgesic effect in chronic pain and in response to provoked pain. These results highlight the potential of DLPFC-rTMS in the management of certain chronic pain conditions and future directions are discussed to enhance the potential long-term analgesic effects.

Chronic Migraine Preventive Treatment by Prefrontal-Occipital Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS): A Proof-of-Concept Study on the Effect of Psychiatric Comorbidities

Chronic migraine (CM) is often complicated by medication overuse headache (MOH) and psychiatric comorbidities that may influence the clinical outcome. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between psychiatric comorbidities and the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients with CM with or without MOH. We recruited 16 consecutive CM patients who had an unsatisfactory response to at least three pharmacological preventive therapies. They were treated with anodal right-prefrontal and cathodal occipital tDCS (intensity: 2 mA, time: 20 min) three times per week for 4 weeks. All patients underwent a psychopathological assessment before and after treatment, and five of them were diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD). After treatment, all the patients showed a significant decrease of severe and overall headache days per month. Despite having a higher migraine burden at baseline, patients with CM and BD showed a significantly greater reduction of severe headaches and psychiatric symptoms. Overall, tDCS seems to be effective in the treatment of CM patients with a poor response to different classes of pharmacological therapies, whereas BD status positively influences the response of migraineurs to tDCS.

Non-Pharmacological Approaches to Headaches: Non-Invasive Neuromodulation, Nutraceuticals, and Behavioral Approaches

Significant side effects or drug interactions can make pharmacological management of headache disorders very difficult. Non-conventional and non-pharmacological treatments are becoming increasingly used to overcome these issues. In particular, non-invasive neuromodulation, nutraceuticals, and behavioral approaches are well tolerated and indicated for specific patient categories such as adolescents and pregnant women. This paper aims to present the main approaches reported in the literature in the management of headache disorders. We therefore reviewed the available literature published between 2010 and 2020 and performed a narrative presentation for each of the three categories (non-invasive neuromodulation, nutraceuticals, and behavioral therapies). Regarding non-invasive neuromodulation, we selected transcranial magnetic stimulation, supraorbital nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation, and caloric vestibular stimulation. For nutraceuticals, we selected Feverfew, Butterbur, Riboflavin, Magnesium, and Coenzyme Q10. Finally, for behavioral approaches, we selected biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, relaxation techniques, mindfulness-based therapy, and acceptance and commitment therapy. These approaches are increasingly seen as a valid treatment option in headache management, especially for patients with medication overuse or contraindications to drug treatment. However, further investigations are needed to consider the effectiveness of these approaches also with respect to the long-term effects.

Cortical Modulation of Nociception

Nociception is the neuronal process of encoding noxious stimuli and could be modulated at peripheral, spinal, brainstem, and cortical levels. At cortical levels, several areas including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), prefrontal cortex (PFC), ventrolateral orbital cortex (VLO), insular cortex (IC), motor cortex (MC), and somatosensory cortices are involved in nociception modulation through two main mechanisms: (i) a descending modulatory effect at spinal level by direct corticospinal projections or mostly by activation of brainstem structures (i.e. periaqueductal grey matter (PAG), locus coeruleus (LC), the nucleus of raphe (RM) and rostroventral medulla (RVM)); and by (ii) cortico-cortical or cortico-subcortical interactions. This review summarizes evidence related to the participation of the aforementioned cortical areas in nociception modulation and different neurotransmitters or neuromodulators that have been studied in each area. Besides, we point out the importance of considering intracortical neuronal populations and receptors expression, as well as, nociception-induced cortical changes, both functional and connectional, to better understand this modulatory effect. Finally, we discuss the possible mechanisms that could potentiate the use of cortical stimulation as a promising procedure in pain alleviation.

Effects of High-Frequency rTMS on Negative Symptoms and Cognitive Function in Hospitalized Patients With Chronic Schizophrenia: A Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Pilot Trial

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over left dorsolateral pre-frontal cortex (DLPFC) in ameliorating negative symptoms and cognitive impairments in patients with chronic schizophrenia. Fifty-two patients with chronic schizophrenia were randomly assigned to two groups: active rTMS group and sham rTMS group, with existing antipsychotic drugs combined 20 sessions of 10 Hz active/sham rTMS over DLPFC (20 min/session, 5 times/week). The PANSS, RBANS, and SCWT were used to evaluate the clinical symptoms and cognitive functions of the patients. Our results indicated significant improvements in clinical symptoms (PANSS total and subscale scores) and cognitive functions (RBANS total and subscale scores, card 1 and card 3 of the SCWT test) (All p <0.05) after 4-week intervention both in active and sham rTMS group. Moreover, the active rTMS group showed more effective on ameliorating negative symptoms (p = 0.002), immediate memory (p = 0.016) and delayed memory (p = 0.047) compared to the sham group. Interestingly, PANSS negative symptom scores was negatively correlated with RBANS language scores in the real stimulation group (p = 0.046). The study found that the high frequency rTMS stimulation over left DLPFC as a supplement to antipsychotics may have potential benefits in improving clinical symptoms and cognitive functions in patients with chronic schizophrenia.

Neuromodulation techniques for acute and preventive migraine treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Several neuromodulation methods exists for migraine treatment. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on migraine treatment using neurostimulation methods.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase up to July 1, 2020 for RCTs reporting acute or preventive treatment of migraine with either non-invasive or invasive neurostimulation methods. Two researchers independently assessed the eligibility of the retrieved studies and extracted data. Outcomes for the quantitative synthesis were 2 h pain free for acute treatment and headache days per month for preventive treatment. We performed subgroup analyses by treatment (stimulation method and site of application). Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight articles were included in the qualitative analysis (7 acute, 31 preventive) and 34 in the quantitative evaluation (6 acute, 28 preventive). Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) was effective for acute treatment. Data were insufficient to draw conclusions for any other techniques (single studies). Invasive occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was effective for migraine prevention, with a large effect size but considerable heterogeneity, whereas supra-orbital transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PENS), and high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) were effective, with small to medium effect sizes. Vagus-nerve stimulation, left prefrontal cortex rTMS, and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the M1 had no significant effect and heterogeneity was high.

CONCLUSION

Several neuromodulation methods are of potential interest for migraine management, but the quality of the evidence is very poor. Future large and well-conducted studies are needed and could improve on the present results.

The role of left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation in episodic migraine prophylaxis

Objective

The aim of the study was to examine the prophylactic role of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on the frequency, and severity of migraine attacks in episodic migraineurs who failed medical treatment.

Methods

A randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled study was designed to assess the effect of 5 Hz rTMS applied over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (LDLPFC ) in 33 migraineurs. Patients were followed up for 1 month before receiving rTMS, and for another month after the sessions by a headache diary. The primary outcome measure was the achievement of 50% reduction in the number of migraine attacks. Secondary outcome measures included migraine days, assessment of migraine attack severity, disability by HIT-6, and side-effects to the procedure.

Results

The study revealed that 69.2% of the active treatment group achieved 50% or more reduction in the number of migraine attacks versus 25% of cases in the control group (p = 0.02). The absolute number of migraine attacks was reduced by 3.1 vs 1.5 in the active and control group, respectively. The number of cases with severe HIT-6 scores was reduced by 46.2% in active treatment group versus a 7.1% reduction in the control group (p = 0.02).

Conclusion

High-frequency rTMS applied to LDLPFC can reduce the number of migraine attacks by 50% or more in almost 70% of a sample of episodic migraineurs with a concomitant decrease in functional disability.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04031781. Registered 23 July 2019—retrospectively registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04031781?term=Migraine+Prophylaxis&recrs=ce&type=Intr&cond=Migraine&rank=9

Low Intensity, Transcranial, Alternating Current Stimulation Reduces Migraine Attack Burden in a Home Application Set-Up: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Feasibility Study

Background: Low intensity, high-frequency transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) applied over the motor cortex decreases the amplitude of motor evoked potentials. This double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study aimed to test the efficacy of this method for acute management of migraines. Methods: The patients received either active (0.4 mA, 140 Hz) or sham stimulation for 15 min over the visual cortex with the number of terminated attacks two hours post-stimulation as the primary endpoint, as a home therapy option. They were advised to treat a maximum of five migraine attacks over the course of six weeks. Results: From forty patients, twenty-five completed the study, sixteen in the active and nine in the sham group with a total of 102 treated migraine attacks. The percentage of terminated migraine attacks not requiring acute rescue medication was significantly higher in the active (21.5%) than in the sham group (0%), and the perceived pain after active stimulation was significantly less for 2–4 h post-stimulation than after sham stimulation. Conclusion: tACS over the visual cortex has the potential to terminate migraine attacks. Nevertheless, the high drop-out rate due to compliance problems suggests that this method is impeded by its complexity and time-consuming setup.

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

Diagnosis and treatment of migraine: Russian experts' recommendations

Migraine is one of the most common types of headache, which can lead to a significant decrease in quality of life. Researchers identify migraine with aura, migraine without aura, and chronic migraine that substantially reduces the ability of patients to work and is frequently concurrent with mental disorders and drug-induced headache. The complications of migraine include status migrainosus, persistent aura without infarction, migrainous infarction (stroke), and a migraine aura-induced seizure. The diagnosis of migraine is based on complaints, past medical history, objective examination data, and the diagnostic criteria as laid down in the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3 rd edition. Add-on trials are recommended only in the presence of red flags, such as the symptoms warning about the secondary nature of headache. Migraine treatment is aimed at reducing the frequency and intensity of attacks and the amount of analgesics taken. It includes three main approaches: behavioral therapy, seizure relief therapy, and preventive therapy. Behavioral therapy focuses on lifestyle modification. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, simple and combined analgesics, triptans, and antiemetic drugs for severe nausea or vomiting are recommended for seizure relief. Preventive therapy which includes antidepressants, anticonvulsants, beta-blockers, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, botulinum toxin type A-hemagglutinin complex and monoclonal antibodies to calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptors, is indicated for frequent or severe migraine attacks and for chronic migraine. Pharmacotherapy is recommended to be combined with non-drug methods that involves cognitive behavioral therapy; progressive muscle relaxation; mindfulness; biofeedback; post-isometric relaxation; acupuncture; therapeutic exercises; greater occipital nerve block; non-invasive high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; external stimulation of first trigeminal branch; and electrical stimulation of the occipital nerves (neurostimulation).

Neuronavigation based 10 sessions of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy in chronic migraine: an exploratory study

INTRODUCTION

Chronic migraine is a disease of altered cortical excitability. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation provides a novel non-invasive method to target the nociceptive circuits in the cortex. Motor cortex is one such potential target. In this study, we targeted the left motor cortex using fMRI-guided neuronavigation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty right-handed patients were randomized into real and sham rTMS group. Baseline subjective pain assessments were done using visual analog scale (VAS) and questionnaires: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Becks Depression Inventory, and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Objectively, pain was assessed by means of thermal pain thresholds using quantitative sensory testing. For corticomotor excitability parameters, resting motor thresholds and motor-evoked potentials were mapped. For rTMS total, 600 pulses in 10 trains at 10 Hz with an intertrain interval of 60 s were delivered in each session. Ten such sessions were given 5 days per week over 2 consecutive weeks. The duration of each session was 10 min. Real rTMS was administered at 70% of Resting MT. All the tests were repeated post-intervention and after 1 month of follow-up. There are no studies reporting the use of fMRI-based TMS for targeting the motor cortex in CM patients.

RESULTS

We observed a significant reduction in the mean VAS rating, headache frequency, and MIDAS questionnaire in real rTMS group which was maintained after 1 month of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Ten sessions of fMRI-based rTMS over the left motor cortex may provide long-term pain relief in CM, but further studies are warranted to confirm our preliminary findings.

The visual system as target of non-invasive brain stimulation for migraine treatment: Current insights and future challenges

The visual network is crucially implicated in the pathophysiology of migraine. Several lines of evidence indicate that migraine is characterized by an altered visual cortex excitability both during and between attacks. Visual symptoms, the most common clinical manifestation of migraine aura, are likely the result of cortical spreading depression originating from the extrastriate area V3A. Photophobia, a clinical hallmark of migraine, is linked to an abnormal sensory processing of the thalamus which is converged with the non-image forming visual pathway. Finally, visual snow is an increasingly recognized persistent visual phenomenon in migraine, possibly caused by increased perception of subthreshold visual stimuli. Emerging research in non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has vastly developed into a diversity of areas with promising potential. One of its clinical applications is the single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (sTMS) applied over the occipital cortex which has been approved for treating migraine with aura, albeit limited evidence. Studies have also investigated other NIBS techniques, such as repetitive TMS (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), for migraine prophylaxis but with conflicting results. As a dynamic brain disorder with widespread pathophysiology, targeting migraine with NIBS is challenging. Furthermore, unlike the motor cortex, evidence suggests that the visual cortex may be less plastic. Controversy exists as to whether the same fundamental principles of NIBS, based mainly on findings in the motor cortex, can be applied to the visual cortex. This review aims to explore existing literature surrounding NIBS studies on the visual system of migraine. We will first provide an overview highlighting the direct implication of the visual network in migraine. Next, we will focus on the rationale behind using NIBS for migraine treatment, including its effects on the visual cortex, and the shortcomings of currently available evidence. Finally, we propose a broader perspective of how novel approaches, the concept of brain networks and the integration of multimodal imaging with computational modeling, can help refine current NIBS methods, with the ultimate goal of optimizing a more individualized treatment for migraine.

Alleviation of migraine symptoms by application of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation to myofascial trigger points of neck and shoulder muscles - A randomized trial

Migraine is a burdensome disease with an especially high prevalence in women between the age of 15 and 49 years. Non-pharmacological, non-invasive therapeutic methods to control symptoms are increasingly in demand to complement a multimodal intervention approach in migraine. Thirty-seven subjects (age: 25.0 ± 4.1 years; 36 females) diagnosed with high-frequency episodic migraine who presented at least one active myofascial trigger point (mTrP) in the trapezius muscles and at least one latent mTrP in the deltoid muscles bilaterally prospectively underwent six sessions of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) over two weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to receive rPMS applied to the mTrPs of the trapezius (n = 19) or deltoid muscles (n = 18). Whereas the trapezius muscle is supposed to be part of the trigemino-cervical complex (TCC) and, thus, involved in the pathophysiology of migraine, the deltoid muscle was not expected to interfere with the TCC and was therefore chosen as a control stimulation site. The headache calendar of the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG) as well as the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire were used to evaluate stimulation-related effects. Frequency of headache days decreased significantly in both the trapezius and the deltoid group after six sessions of rPMS (trapezius group: p = 0.005; deltoid group: p = 0.003). The MIDAS score decreased significantly from 29 to 13 points (p = 0.0004) in the trapezius and from 31 to 15 points (p = 0.002) in the deltoid group. Thus, rPMS applied to mTrPs of neck and shoulder muscles offers a promising approach to alleviate headache frequency and symptom burden. Future clinical trials are needed to examine more profoundly these effects, preferably using a sham-controlled setting.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Pain, Headache, and Comorbid Depression: INS-NANS Expert Consensus Panel Review and Recommendation

BACKGROUND

While transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been studied for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, emerging evidence supports its use for pain and headache by stimulating either motor cortex (M1) or dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). However, its clinical implementation is hindered due to a lack of consensus in the quality of clinical evidence and treatment recommendation/guideline(s). Thus, working collaboratively, this multinational multidisciplinary expert panel aims to: 1) assess and rate the existing outcome evidence of TMS in various pain/headache conditions; 2) provide TMS treatment recommendation/guidelines for the evaluated conditions and comorbid depression; and 3) assess the cost-effectiveness and technical issues relevant to the long-term clinical implementation of TMS for pain and headache.

METHODS

Seven task groups were formed under the guidance of a 5-member steering committee with four task groups assessing the utilization of TMS in the treatment of Neuropathic Pain (NP), Acute Pain, Primary Headache Disorders, and Posttraumatic Brain Injury related Headaches (PTBI-HA), and remaining three assessing the treatment for both pain and comorbid depression, and the cost-effectiveness and technological issues relevant to the treatment.

RESULTS

The panel rated the overall level of evidence and recommendability for clinical implementation of TMS as: 1) high and extremely/strongly for both NP and PTBI-HA respectively; 2) moderate for postoperative pain and migraine prevention, and recommendable for migraine prevention. While the use of TMS for treating both pain and depression in one setting is clinically and financially sound, more studies are required to fully assess the long-term benefit of the treatment for the two highly comorbid conditions, especially with neuronavigation.

CONCLUSIONS

After extensive literature review, the panel provided recommendations and treatment guidelines for TMS in managing neuropathic pain and headaches. In addition, the panel also recommended more outcome and cost-effectiveness studies to assess the feasibility of the long-term clinical implementation of the treatment.

Sensory Neuromodulation

We describe a model of neurological disease based on dysfunctional brain oscillators. This is not a new model, but it is not one that is widely appreciated by clinicians. The value of this model lies in the predictions it makes and the utility it provides in translational applications, in particular for neuromodulation devices. Specifically, we provide a perspective on devices that provide input to sensory receptors and thus stimulate endogenous sensory networks. Current forms of clinically applied neuromodulation, including devices such as (implanted) deep brain stimulators (DBS) and various, noninvasive methods such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial current methods (tACS, tDCS), have been studied extensively. The potential strength of neuromodulation of a sensory organ is access to the same pathways that natural environmental stimuli use and, importantly, the modulatory signal will be transformed as it travels through the brain, allowing the modulation input to be consistent with regional neuronal dynamics. We present specific examples of devices that rely on sensory neuromodulation and evaluate the translational potential of these approaches. We argue that sensory neuromodulation is well suited to, ideally, repair dysfunctional brain oscillators, thus providing a broad therapeutic approach for neurological diseases.

Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Pain Management: A Systematic Narrative Review

Recently, clinicians have been using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating various pain conditions. This systematic narrative review aimed to examine the use and efficacy of rTMS for controlling various pain conditions. A PubMed search was conducted for articles that were published until June 7, 2019 and used rTMS for pain alleviation. The key search phrase for identifying potentially relevant articles was (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation AND pain). The following inclusion criteria were applied for article selection: (1) patients with pain, (2) rTMS was applied for pain management, and (3) follow-up evaluations were performed after rTMS stimulation to assess the reduction in pain. Review articles were excluded. Overall, 1,030 potentially relevant articles were identified. After reading the titles and abstracts and assessing eligibility based on the full-text articles, 106 publications were finally included in our analysis. Overall, our findings suggested that rTMS is beneficial for treating neuropathic pain of various origins, such as central pain, pain from peripheral nerve disorders, fibromyalgia, and migraine. Although data on the use of rTMS for orofacial pain, including trigeminal neuralgia, phantom pain, low back pain, myofascial pain syndrome, pelvic pain, and complex regional pain syndrome, were promising, there was insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of rTMS for treating these conditions. Therefore, further studies are needed to validate the effects of rTMS on pain relief in these conditions. Overall, this review will help guide clinicians in making informed decisions regarding whether rTMS is an appropriate option for managing various pain conditions.

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.

A systematic review of high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor cortex areas as a migraine preventive treatment

Background:

The results of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for migraine have been inconsistent. However, high-frequency rTMS over the motor cortex is a treatment that may be effective in relieving symptoms of migraine with a low risk of side effects.

Methods:

A systematic review of high-frequency rTMS over the brain motor cortex areas in human participants was conducted to assess efficacy in treating migraine. Articles that were not looking at migraine patients, stimulation over the left motor cortex, or were not in English were excluded. Nine articles representing eight experiments using high-frequency rTMS over the motor cortex areas for migraine in human participants were extracted from the databases of PubMed, PsycINFO, MedLine, CINAHL, and BioMed Central.

Results:

Two-hundred and seven of 213 patients completed treatment throughout all the studies examined. High-frequency rTMS over the motor cortex areas for migraine improved migraine frequency in seven of eight studies. Two of the eight studies were randomized controlled trials at low risk for biases and found high-frequency rTMS over the motor cortex areas effective in improving migraine frequency and severity. Other details of treatment prescription and symptoms were also examined.

Conclusion:

High-frequency rTMS over the motor cortex areas for migraine demonstrated efficacy as a migraine treatment, had minimal side effects, and should be further investigated.

Noninvasive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) in Chronic Refractory Pain: A Systematic Review

Efficacy and tolerance of pharmacological medications in chronic pain are limited. Therefore, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is regarded as a secure therapeutic option for pain relief, and it was proven to produce an analgesic effect. A wide variety of stimulation parameters can influence its long-lasting antalgic effect. Defining the best stimulation protocol can afford greater uniformity and consistency for considering rTMS as a promising effective tool. We aimed to systematically review and evaluate the current literature on transcranial magnetic stimulation for patients suffering from chronic pain, assess its efficacy, and estimate the best stimulation protocol. The Screened and tested electronic databases comprised PubMed, Ovid Medline, Cochrane database library, and Google scholar from the year 2000 till 2018. The keywords utilizing search terms "Transcranial magnetic stimulation", "chronic pain", "neuropathic pain" were used to study all possible randomized clinical trials about the impact of transcranial magnetic stimulation on long-lasting pain. All articles were judged for the possibility of prejudice using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for data extraction. Search engines produced seventy applicable results. Twelve randomized controlled clinical trials were included involving 350 patients with focal and generalized chronic pain. An existing proof showed a null response of low-frequency rTMS stimulation, rTMS delivered to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in chronic pain patients. However, a witnessed pain-killing response was documented when applying active high- frequency TMS on the motor cortex M1 area compared to sham. Pain relief was detected for a short time following the application of active high-frequency motor cortex stimulation in nine clinical trials, and the long-lasting analgesic effect was proved. No side effects were mentioned for the technique. Repetitive TMS can produce clinically meaningful relief from chronic pain, despite positive results, heterogeneity among all studies preclude firm conclusions regarding the optimal target stimulation site and parameters. Further studies are required to minimize bias, enhance performance, and define the best brain stimulation conditions and qualifications to maximize its potency.

Effects of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation on Headache Intensity and Frequency of Headache Attacks in Patients With Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), as well as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) electrically stimulate the brain and modify brain activity to suppress pain. This method is emerging as a potential clinical intervention against migraine.

OBJECTIVE

To quantitatively review the efficacy of rTMS and tDCS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in modifying headache intensity and frequency of headache attacks in patients suffering from migraine.

METHODS

We searched 5 databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus for articles from January 2000 to September 2018. Any RCT regarding the efficacy on rTMS and tDCS on patients with migraine, was considered to be included. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to pool effect sizes of outcomes related to headache intensity or frequency of headache attacks. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with 276 participants in total (experimental group [EG] = 149; control group [CG] = 127) were included in this review. Five included articles used rTMS (EG = 81; CG = 80), and 4 used tDCS (EG = 68; CG = 47). Meta-analysis of excitatory primary motor cortex (M1) stimulation showed significant effects on reducing headache intensity in patients with migraine (Hedges' g = -0.94; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.59; P < .001, I²  = 18.39%) with a large effect size. Meta-analysis of excitatory M1 stimulation showed significant effects on reducing frequency of headache attacks in patients with migraine, with a large effect size (Hedges' g = -0.88; 95% CI, -1.38 to -0.38; P = .001, I²  = 57.15%). Excitatory dorsolateral prefrontal cortex stimulation showed a significant effect on the headache intensity in patients with migraine (Hedges' g = -1.14; 95% CI, -2.21 to -0.07; P = .04, I²  = 61.86%) with a large effect size. However, reductions of frequency of headache attacks was not significant.

LIMITATIONS

Potential differential effects of rTMS and tDCS, various sham methods, and potential overlapping headache disorders among included subjects may affect the estimation of effect sizes.

CONCLUSION

Excitatory NIBS of the M1 is likely to reduce headache intensity and the frequency of headache attacks in patients with migraine.

Consensus of the Brazilian Headache Society on the treatment of chronic migraine

Chronic migraine poses a significant personal, social and economic burden and is characterized by headache present on 15 or more days per month for at least three months, with at least eight days of migrainous headache per month. It is frequently associated with analgesic or acute migraine medication overuse and this should not be overlooked. The present consensus was elaborated upon by a group of members of the Brazilian Headache Society in order to describe current evidence and to provide recommendations related to chronic migraine pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment. Withdrawal strategies in medication overuse headache are also described, as well as treatment risks during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Oral topiramate and onabotulinum toxin A injections are the only treatments granted Class A recommendation, while valproate, gabapentin, and tizanidine received Class B recommendation, along with acupuncture, biofeedback, and mindfulness. The anti-CGRP or anti-CGRPr monoclonal antibodies, still unavailable in Brazil, are promising new drugs already approved elsewhere for migraine prophylactic treatment, the efficacy of which in chronic migraine is still to be definitively proven.

Using Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy to Study the Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Concussion: A Two-Patient Case Study

Background: Approximately 25% of concussion patients experience persistent post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been explored as a treatment, and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) may be a cost-effective method for assessing response. Objectives: Evaluate rTMS for the treatment of PPCS and introduce fNIRS as a method of assessing treatment response. Methods: Design: Two-patient case study. Setting: Calgary Brain Injury Program. Participants: 47 and 49 years. male, with PPCS for 1-2 years (headache, cognitive difficulties, nausea, visual difficulties, irritability, anxiety, poor mood, sleep, and fatigue). Intervention: 10 sessions of rTMS therapy to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), at 10 Hz (600 pulses) and 70% of resting motor threshold amplitude. Participants completed an 8-week headache diary and a battery of clinical questionnaires prior to each fNIRS session. fNIRS: Hemodynamic changes were recorded over the frontoparietal cortex during rest, finger tapping, and a graded working memory test. fNIRS was completed pre-rTMS, following rTMS (day 14), and at 1-month post-rTMS (day 45). For comparison, two healthy, sex-matched controls were scanned with fNIRS once daily for five consecutive days. Results: Clinical scores improved (headache severity, MoCA, HIT-6, PHQ-9, GAD-7, QOLIBRI, RPSQ, BCPSI) or remained stable (PCL-5, headache frequency) post-rTMS, for both participants. Participant 1 reported moderate symptom burden, and a fNIRS task-evoked hemodynamic response showing increased oxyhemoglobin was observed following a working memory task, as expected. Participant 2 exhibited a high symptom burden pre-treatment, with abnormal fNIRS hemodynamic response where oxyhemoglobin declined, in response to task. One month following rTMS treatment, participant 2 had a normal fNIRS hemodynamic response to task, corresponding to significant improvements in clinical outcomes. Conclusion: This case study suggests fNIRS may be sensitive to physiological changes that accompany rTMS treatment. Further studies exploring fNIRS as a cost-effective technology for monitoring rTMS response in patients with PPCS are suggested.

Noninvasive neuromodulation in migraine and cluster headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the currently available noninvasive neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade, several noninvasive devices have undergone development and clinical trials to evaluate efficacy and safety. Based on this body of work, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcutaneous supraorbital neurostimulation, and noninvasive vagal nerve stimulation devices have been cleared by the United States Food and Drug Administration and are available for clinical use for the treatment of primary headache disorders.

SUMMARY

Overall, these novel noninvasive devices appear to be safe, well tolerated, and have demonstrated promising results in clinical trials in both migraine and cluster headache. This narrative review will provide a summary and update of the proposed mechanisms of action, evidence, safety, and future directions of various currently available modalities of noninvasive neuromodulation for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

Treating Chronic Migraine With Neuromodulation: The Role of Neurophysiological Abnormalities and Maladaptive Plasticity

Chronic migraine (CM) is the most disabling form of migraine, because pharmacological treatments have low efficacy and cumbersome side effects. New evidence has shown that migraine is primarily a disorder of brain plasticity and migraine chronification depends on a maladaptive process favoring the development of a brain state of hyperexcitability. Due to the ability to induce plastic changes in the brain, researchers started to look at Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) as a possible therapeutic option in migraine field. On one side, NIBS techniques induce changes of neural plasticity that outlast the period of the stimulation (a fundamental prerequisite of a prophylactic migraine treatment, concurrently they allow targeting neurophysiological abnormalities that contribute to the transition from episodic to CM. The action may thus influence not only the cortex but also brainstem and diencephalic structures. Plus, NIBS is not burdened by serious medication side effects and drug–drug interactions. Although the majority of the studies reported somewhat beneficial effects in migraine patients, no standard intervention has been defined. This may be due to methodological differences regarding the used techniques (e.g., transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation), the brain regions chosen as targets, and the stimulation types (e.g., the use of inhibitory and excitatory stimulations on the basis of opposite rationales), and an intrinsic variability of stimulation effect. Hence, it is difficult to draw a conclusion on the real effect of neuromodulation in migraine. In this article, we first will review the definition and mechanisms of brain plasticity, some neurophysiological hallmarks of migraine, and migraine chronification-related (dys)plasticity. Secondly, we will review available results from therapeutic and physiological studies using neuromodulation in CM. Lastly we will discuss the results obtained in these preventive trials in the light of a possible effect on brain plasticity.

Patients with sickle-cell disease exhibit greater functional connectivity and centrality in the locus coeruleus compared to anemic controls

•

Patients with sickle-cell disease (SCD) have greater resting-state functional connectivity between the locus coeruleus (LC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC).

•

Patients with SCD have greater resting state centrality of the LC

•

SCD patients with chronic pain exhibited even greater functional connectivity between the LC and dlPFC.

•

This study supports hyper-connectivity between the LC and PFC is a potential chronic pain generator.

Dramatic placebo effect of high frequency repetitive TMS in treatment of chronic migraine and medication overuse headache

Chronic migraine (CM) is often associated with medication overuse headache (MOH). Few small trials have been conducted on Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for CM treatment, but results are conflicting. Aim of the study was to investigate the effects of high frequency of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (hf-rTMS) in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex combined with strongly suggesting to avoid medications overuse in patients suffering with CM and MOH. A six-month single-centre perspective randomized double-blinded study was conducted at the Headache Centre of Trieste. Patients suffering with CM and MOH were randomly enrolled in two groups to receive active hf-rTMS in DLPFC or sham hf-rTMS. Headache days (HD), headache hours (HH) and symptomatic drug intake (SDI) were recorded for 30 days before the beginning of stimulation (T0) and during the three following months (T3). Disability (MIDAS score) was evaluated at T0 and at the three-month follow-up visit. The primary outcome was the evaluation of reduction of HD. Reduction of SDI, HH and disability were considered as secondary outcomes. Out of 26 patients enrolled, 14 completed the study, 7 underwent hf-rTMS and 7 sham-TMS. There were no significant differences between groups at T0 in demographic data and headache measures. Mean number of HD, HH, SDI, and MIDAS similarly reduced in the two groups. Our study failed in demonstrating that hf-rTMS with detoxification advice could be better than detoxification advice alone in CM treatment. hf-rTMS carries a high potential of inducing placebo effect and this can be usefully leveraged to enhance patients' coping strategies.