Comparing the Impact of Multi-Session Left Dorsolateral Prefrontal and Primary Motor Cortex Neuronavigated Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (nrTMS) on Chronic Pain Patients

Intermittent theta-burst stimulation combined with physical therapy as an optimal rehabilitation in Parkinson's disease: study protocol for a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

First-line rehabilitative strategies to improve motor deficits are based on functional training (physical or occupational therapy), which has been demonstrated to facilitate neural reorganisation. Accumulating evidence suggests that non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, such as repetitive TMS (rTMS), may enhance neuroplasticity, thereby facilitating neural reorganisation and recovery from Parkinson's disease. Evidence also shows that intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) can improve motor function and quality of life in patients by promoting the excitability and neural remodelling of cerebral cortex. We aimed to combine iTBS stimulation with physiotherapy to improve the rehabilitation effect compared to physiotherapy alone in patients with Parkinson's disease.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind clinical trial will enrol 50 Parkinson's disease patients aged 45-70 years with Hoehn and Yahr scale scores of 1-3. Patients are randomly assigned to either the iTBS + physiotherapy or sham-iTBS + physiotherapy group. The trial consists of a 2-week double-blind treatment period and a 24-week follow-up period. iTBS and sham-iTBS will be administered twice daily for 10 days based on physiotherapy. The primary outcome will be the third part of Movement Disorders-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS III) from the baseline to the first 2 days following completion hospitalised intervention. The secondary outcome will be 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) at 4 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks after intervention. Tertiary outcomes are clinical evaluations and mechanism study outcomes such as NMSS, 6MWD, 10MT, TUG, BBS, MRI, and EEG, the length of time between the drug needs to be adjusted when symptoms fluctuate.

DISCUSSION

The aim of this study is to demonstrate that iTBS can promote overall function and quality of life in Parkinson's disease patients using physiotherapy and that this efficacy may be associated with altered neuroplasticity in exercise-related brain regions. The iTBS combined with physiotherapy training model will be evaluated during a 6-month follow-up period. With significant improvement in quality of life and motor function, iTBS combined with physiotherapy can be considered as a first-line rehabilitation option for Parkinson's disease. The potential of iTBS to enhance neuroplasticity in the brain should have a more positive impact in increasing the generality and efficiency of physiotherapy, improving the quality of life and overall functional status of patients with Parkinson's disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200056581. Registered on 8 February 2022.

The immediate effects of iTBS on the muscle activation pattern under challenging balance conditions in the patients with chronic low back pain: A preliminary study

Background

The patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) showed impaired postural control, especially in challenging postural task. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is reported to involve in the complex balance task, which required considerable attentional control. The effect of intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) over the DLPFC to the capacity of postural control of CLBP patients is still unknown.

Methods

Participants diagnosed with CLBP received a single-session iTBS over the left DLPFC. All the participants completed the postural control tasks of single-leg (left/right) standing before and after iTBS. The activation changes of the DLPFC and M1 before and after iTBS were recorded by functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). The activation pattern of the trunk [transversus abdominis (TrA), superficial lumbar multifidus (SLM)] and leg [tibialis anterior (TA), gastrocnemius medialis (GM)] muscles including root mean square (RMS) and co-contraction index (CCI) during single-leg standing were measured by surface electromyography (sEMG) before and after the intervention. The paired t-test was used to test the difference before and after iTBS. Pearson correlation analyses were performed to test the relationship between the oxyhemoglobin concentration and sEMG outcome variables (RMS and CCI).

Results

Overall, 20 participants were recruited. In the right-leg standing condition, compared with before iTBS, the CCI of the right TrA/SLM was significantly decreased (t = −2.172, p = 0.043), and the RMS of the right GM was significantly increased (t = 4.024, p = 0.001) after iTBS. The activation of the left DLPFC (t = 2.783, p = 0.012) and left M1 (t = 2.752, p = 0.013) were significantly decreased and the relationship between the left DLPFC and M1 was significant after iTBS (r = 0.575, p = 0.014). Correlation analysis showed the hemoglobin concentration of M1 was negatively correlated with the RMS of the right GM (r = −0.659, p = 0.03) and positively correlated between CCI of the right TrA/SLM (r = 0.503, p = 0.047) after iTBS. There was no significant difference in the brain or muscle activation change in the left leg-standing condition between before and after iTBS.

Conclusion

Intermittent theta burst stimulation over the left DLPFC seems to be able to improve the muscle activation pattern during postural control ability in challenging postural task, which would provide a new approach to the treatment of CLBP.

Anodal-TDCS over Left-DLPFC Modulates Motor Cortex Excitability in Chronic Lower Back Pain

Chronic pain is associated with abnormal cortical excitability and increased pain intensity. Research investigating the potential for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate motor cortex excitability and reduce pain in individuals with chronic lower back pain (CLBP) yield mixed results. The present randomised, placebo-controlled study examined the impact of anodal-tDCS over left-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (left-DLPFC) on motor cortex excitability and pain in those with CLBP. Nineteen participants with CLBP (Mage = 53.16 years, SDage = 14.80 years) received 20-min of sham or anodal tDCS, twice weekly, for 4 weeks. Short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF) were assessed using paired-pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation prior to and immediately following the tDCS intervention. Linear Mixed Models revealed no significant effect of tDCS group or time, on SICI or ICF. The interactions between tDCS group and time on SICI and ICF only approached significance. Bayesian analyses revealed the anodal-tDCS group demonstrated higher ICF and SICI following the intervention compared to the sham-tDCS group. The anodal-tDCS group also demonstrated a reduction in pain intensity and self-reported disability compared to the sham-tDCS group. These findings provide preliminary support for anodal-tDCS over left-DLPFC to modulate cortical excitability and reduce pain in CLBP.

Cortical stimulation for chronic pain: from anecdote to evidence

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

Effects of repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex versus motor cortex in patients with neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Neuropathic pain is one of the common complications of spinal cord injuries (SCI), which will slow down the recovery process and result in lower quality of life. Previous studies have shown that repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the motor cortex (M1) can reduce the average pain and the most severe pain of neuropathic pain after SCI. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) area is a common target of rTMS. Recently, a few studies found that rTMS of DLPFC may relieve the neuropathic pain of SCI. Compared with the M1 area, the efficacy of rTMS treatment in the DLPFC area in improving neuropathic pain and pain-related symptoms in patients with SCI is still unclear. Therefore, our study aims to evaluate the non-inferiority of rTMS in the DLPFC vs M1 in patients with neuropathic pain after SCI, in order to provide more options for rTMS in treating neuropathic pain after SCI.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will recruit 50 subjects with neuropathic pain after SCI. They will be randomly assigned to the DLPFC- rTMS and M1-rTMS groups and be treated with rTMS for 4 weeks. Except for the different stimulation sites, the rTMS treatment programmes of the two groups are the same: 10 Hz, 1250 pulses, 115% intensity threshold, once a day, five times a week for 4 weeks. VAS, simplified McGill Pain Questionnaire, Spinal Cord Injury Pain Date Set, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Hamilton Anxiety Scale will be evaluated at baseline, second week of treatment, fourth week of treatment and 4 weeks after the end of treatment. And VAS change will be calculated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Committee of the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University has approved this trial, which is numbered KY2020041. Written informed consent will be provided to all participants after verification of the eligibility criteria. The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2000032362.

Difference in Analgesic Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation According to the Site of Pain

High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the primary motor cortex for neuropathic pain has been shown to be effective, according to systematic reviews and therapeutic guidelines. However, our large, rigorous, investigator-initiated, registration-directed clinical trial failed to show a positive primary outcome, and its subgroup analysis suggested that the analgesic effect varied according to the site of pain. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in analgesic effects of rTMS for neuropathic pain between different pain sites by reviewing our previous clinical trials. We included three clinical trials in this mini meta-analysis: a multicenter randomized controlled trial at seven hospitals (N = 64), an investigator-initiated registration-directed clinical trial at three hospitals (N = 142), and an exploratory clinical trial examining different stimulation parameters (N = 22). The primary efficacy endpoint (change in pain scale) was extracted for each patient group with pain in the face, upper limb, or lower limb, and a meta-analysis of the efficacy of active rTMS against sham stimulation was performed. Standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for pain change using a random-effects model. The analgesic effect of rTMS for upper limb pain was favorable (SMD = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.77 to -0.13). In contrast, rTMS did not produce significant pain relief on lower limb pain (SMD = 0.04, 95% CI: -0.33 to 0.41) or face (SMD = -0.24, 95% CI: -1.59 to 1.12). In conclusion, these findings suggest that rTMS provides analgesic effects in patients with neuropathic pain in the upper limb, but not in the lower limb or face, under the conditions of previous clinical trials. Owing to the main limitation of small number of studies included, many aspects should be clarified by further research and high-quality studies in these patients.