Search

The efficacy and acceptability of various non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) interventions for autism spectrum disorder remain unclear. We carried out a systematic review for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding NIBS for reducing autistic symptoms (INPLASY202370003). Sixteen articles (N = 709) met the inclusion criteria for network meta-analysis. Effect sizes were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) or odds ratios with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Fourteen active NIBS interventions, including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcranial pulse stimulation were analyzed. Only anodal tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex paired with cathodal tDCS over an extracephalic location (atDCS_F3 + ctDCS_E) significantly improved autistic symptoms compared to sham controls (SMD = - 1.40, 95 %CIs = - 2.67 to - 0.14). None of the NIBS interventions markedly improved social-communication symptoms or restricted/repetitive behaviors in autistic participants. Moreover, no active NIBS interventions exhibited significant dropout rate differences compared to sham controls, and no serious adverse events were reported for any intervention., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement All authors declare no financial interests or potential conflicts of interest regarding the authorship and publication of this article., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Altered somatosensory processing in the posterior insula may play a role in chronic pain development and contribute to Parkinson disease (PD)-related pain. Posterior-superior insula (PSI) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been demonstrated to have analgesic effects among patients with some chronic pain conditions. This study aimed at assessing the efficacy of PSI-rTMS for treating PD-related pain., Methods: This was a double-blinded, randomized, sham-controlled, parallel-arm trial (NCT03504748). People with PD (PwP)-related chronic pain underwent five daily PSI-rTMS sessions for a week, followed by once weekly maintenance stimulations for seven weeks. rTMS was delivered at 10 Hz and 80% of the resting motor threshold. The primary outcome was a ≥ 30% pain intensity reduction at 8 weeks compared to baseline. Functionality, mood, cognitive, motor status, and somatosensory thresholds were also assessed., Results: Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Mean age was 55.2 ± 9.5 years-old, and 56% were female. Nociceptive pain accounted for 60%, and neuropathic and nociplastic for 20% each. No significant difference was found for 30% pain reduction response rates between active (42.7%) and sham groups (14.6%, p = 0.26). Secondary clinical outcomes and sensory thresholds also did not differ significantly. In a post hoc analysis, PwP with nociceptive pain sub-type experienced more pain relief after active (85.7%) compared to sham PSI-rTMS (25%, p = 0.032)., Conclusion: Our preliminary results suggest that different types of PD-related pain may respond differently to treatment, and therefore people with PD may benefit from having PD-related pain well characterized in research trials and in clinical practice., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

The depression response trajectory after a course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation(rTMS) remains understudied. We searched for blinded randomized controlled trials(RCTs) that examined conventional rTMS over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex(DLPFC) for major depressive episodes(MDE). The effect size was calculated as the difference in depression improvement, between active and sham rTMS. We conducted a random-effects dose-response meta-analysis to model the response trajectory from the beginning of rTMS to the post-treatment follow-up phase. The area under curve (AUC) of the first 8-week response trajectory was calculated to compare antidepressant efficacy between different rTMS protocols. We included 40 RCTs(n = 2012). The best-fitting trajectory model exhibited a logarithmic curve(X 2 =17.7, P < 0.001), showing a gradual ascent with tapering off around the 3-4th week mark and maintaining until week 16. The maximum effect size was 6.1(95 %CI: 1.25-10.96) at week 16. The subgroup analyses showed distinct trajectories across different rTMS protocols. Besides, the comparisons of AUC showed that conventional rTMS protocols with more pulse/session group or more total pulses were associated with greater efficacy than those with fewer pulse/session or fewer total pulses, respectively. A course of conventional left DLPFC rTMS could lead to both acute antidepressant effects and sustained after-effects, which were modeled by different rTMS protocols in MDE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All authors declared no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

This study aimed to evaluate the association of the six parameters, namely stimulation intensity, stimulation frequency, pulses per session, treatment duration, number of sessions, and total number of pulses with the efficacy of conventional transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). A random-effects dose-response meta-analysis of blinded randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2391 participants were conducted to examine the dose-effect relationship of six stimulation parameters. Any of the six parameters significantly individually predicted proportion of variance in efficacy: pulses per session (R²=52.7%), treatment duration (R²=51.2%), total sessions (R²=50.9%), frequency (R²=49.6%), total pulses (R²=49.5%), and intensity (R²= 40.4%). Besides, we identified frequency as a potential parameter interacting with the other five parameters, resulting in a significant increase in variance(ΔR 2 ) ranging from 5.0% to 16.7%. Finally, we found that RCTs using frequency > 10 Hz compared to those of 10 Hz showed better dose-effect relationships. We conclude that the six stimulation parameters significantly predict the dose-effect relationship of conventional rTMS on TRD. Besides, higher stimulation frequency, higher stimulation intensity, and adequate number of pulses were associated with treatment efficacy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors declared no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Despite its high lifetime prevalence rate and the elevated disability caused by posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), treatments exhibit modest efficacy. In consideration of the abnormal connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and amygdala in PTSD, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) modalities for PTSD management have been undertaken. However, previous RCTs have reported inconsistent results. The current network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of various NIBS protocols in PTSD management., Methods: We systematically searched ClinicalKey, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ProQuest, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant RCTs. The targeted RCTs was those comparing the efficacy of NIBS interventions, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcutaneous cervical vagal nerve stimulation, in patients with PTSD. The NMA was conducted using a frequentist model. The primary outcomes were changes in the overall severity of PTSD and acceptability (to be specific, rates of dropouts for any reason)., Results: We identified 14 RCTs that enrolled 686 participants. The NMA demonstrated that among the investigated NIBS types, high-frequency rTMS over bilateral DLPFCs was associated with the greatest reduction in overall PTSD severity. Further, in comparison with the sham controls, excitatory stimulation over the right DLPFC with/without excitatory stimulation over left DLPFC were associated with significant reductions in PTSD-related symptoms, including depression and anxiety symptoms, and overall PTSD severity., Conclusions: This NMA demonstrated that excitatory stimulation over the right DLPFC with or without excitatory stimulation over left DLPFC were associated with significant reductions in PTSD-related symptoms., Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42023391562., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Importance: Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) interventions have been shown to be efficacious in several mental disorders, but the optimal dose stimulation parameters for each disorder are unknown., Objective: To define NIBS dose stimulation parameters associated with the greatest efficacy in symptom improvement across mental disorders., Data Sources: Studies were drawn from an updated (to April 30, 2023) previous systematic review based on a search of PubMed, OVID, and Web of Knowledge., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials were selected that tested transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for any mental disorder in adults aged 18 years or older., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors independently extracted the data. A 1-stage dose-response meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test robustness of the findings. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the near-maximal effective doses of total pulses received for TMS and total current dose in coulombs for tDCS., Results: A total of 110 studies with 4820 participants (2659 men [61.4%]; mean [SD] age, 42.3 [8.8] years) were included. The following significant dose-response associations emerged with bell-shaped curves: (1) in schizophrenia, high-frequency (HF) TMS on the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (LDLPFC) for negative symptoms (χ2 = 9.35; df = 2; P = .009) and TMS on the left temporoparietal junction for resistant hallucinations (χ2 = 36.52; df = 2; P < .001); (2) in depression, HF-DLPFC TMS (χ2 = 14.49; df = 2; P < .001); (3) in treatment-resistant depression, LDLPFC tDCS (χ2 = 14.56; df = 2; P < .001); and (4) in substance use disorder, LDLPFC tDCS (χ2 = 33.63; df = 2; P < .001). The following significant dose-response associations emerged with plateaued or ascending curves: (1) in depression, low-frequency (LF) TMS on the right DLPFC (RDLPFC) with ascending curve (χ2 = 25.67; df = 2; P = .001); (2) for treatment-resistant depression, LF TMS on the bilateral DLPFC with ascending curve (χ2 = 5.86; df = 2; P = .004); (3) in obsessive-compulsive disorder, LF-RDLPFC TMS with ascending curve (χ2 = 20.65; df = 2; P < .001) and LF TMS on the orbitofrontal cortex with a plateaued curve (χ2 = 15.19; df = 2; P < .001); and (4) in posttraumatic stress disorder, LF-RDLPFC TMS with ascending curve (χ2 = 54.15; df = 2; P < .001). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main findings., Conclusions and Relevance: The study findings suggest that NIBS yields specific outcomes based on dose parameters across various mental disorders and brain regions. Clinicians should consider these dose parameters when prescribing NIBS. Additional research is needed to prospectively validate the findings in randomized, sham-controlled trials and explore how other parameters contribute to the observed dose-response association.

Aim: This study aimed to examine dose-effects of total pulses on improvement of depressive symptoms in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) receiving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the left dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC)., Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrial.gov databases were systematically searched. We included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCT) that used rTMS over left DLPFC in patients with TRD. Excluded studies were non-TRD, non-RCTs, or combined other brain stimulation interventions. The outcome of interest was the difference between rTMS arms and sham controls in improvement of depressive symptoms in a dose-response manner. A random-effects meta-analysis and dose-response meta-analysis(DRMA) was used to examine antidepressant efficacy of rTMS and association with total pulses., Results: We found that rTMS over left DLPFC is superior to sham controls (reported as standardized mean difference[SMD] with 95% confidence interval: 0.77; 0.56-0.98). The best-fitting model of DRMA was bell-shaped (estimated using restricted cubic spline model; R 2 =0.42), indicating that higher doses (>26,660 total pulses) were not associated with increased improvement of depressive symptoms. Stimulation frequency(R 2 =0.53) and age(R 2 =0.51) were significant moderators for the dose-response curve. Furthermore, 15-20 Hz rTMS was superior to 10 Hz rTMS (0.61, 0.15-1.10) when combining all doses., Conclusions: Our findings suggest higher doses(total pulses) of rTMS were not always associated with increased improvement of depressive symptoms in patients with TRD, and that the dose-response relationship was moderated by stimulation frequency and age. These associations emphasize the importance of determining dosing parameters to achieve maximum efficacy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is a prime target for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to treat neuropsychiatric disorders; thus, abundant efficacy data from controlled trials are available. A cross-diagnostic meta-analysis was conducted to identify the symptom domains susceptible to repetitive TMS to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex., Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effects of repetitive TMS to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on neuropsychiatric symptoms presenting across diagnoses. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for randomised and sham controlled trials published from inception to Aug 17, 2022. Included studies assessed symptoms using clinical measures and reported sufficient data to calculate effect sizes pooled with a random effects model. Two independent reviewers conducted screening and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for quality assessment. Summary data were extracted from published reports. The main outcome was the therapeutic effects of repetitive TMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on distinct symptom domains. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021278458)., Findings: Of 9056 studies identified (6704 from databases and 2352 from registers), 174 were included in the analysis including 7905 patients. 163 of 174 studies reported gender data; 3908 (52·35%) of 7465 patients were male individuals, and 3557 (47·65%) were female individuals. Mean age was 44·63 years (range 19·79-72·80). Ethnicity data were mostly not available. Effect size was large for craving (Hedges'g -0·803 [95% CI -1·099 to -0·507], p<0·0001; I 2 =82·40%), medium for depressive symptoms (-0·725 [-0·889 to -0·561], p<0·0001; I 2 =85·66%), small for anxiety, obsessions or compulsions, pain, global cognition, declarative memory, working memory, cognitive control, and motor coordination (Hedges'g -0·198 to -0·491), and non-significant for attention, suicidal ideation, language, walking ability, fatigue, and sleep., Interpretation: The cross-diagnostic meta-analysis shows the efficacy of repetitive TMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on distinct symptom domains, providing a novel framework for assessing target or efficacy interactions of repetitive TMS, and informing personalised applications for conditions for which regular trials are uninformative., Funding: The University Grants Committee of Hong Kong and the Mental Health Research Center, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests FP reports grants from the German Center for Brain Stimulation research consortium, funding from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, speaker's honoraria from Mag&More, neuroCare Group, and Brainsway, serving as a member of the European Scientific Advisory Board of Brainsway, membership of the International Scientific Advisory Board of Sooma, and support with equipment from neuroConn, Mag&More, and Brainsway, in the past 36 months. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) in older adults is a serious public health concern. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a nonpharmacological intervention approved for MDD treatment in adults, but its value in older adults remains unknown. This study aims to systematically review and meta-analyze evidence of rTMS efficacy in MDD treatment among older adults., Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and open-label studies assessing rTMS for the treatment of MDD in patients older than 50 years, published until June 2020. Random-effects meta-analyses using standardized mean differences (SMDs) were conducted to assess change in depression severity score (primary outcome), while odds ratios (ORs) were used to assess secondary categorical outcomes (response and remission). Additionally, univariate meta-regression analyses were performed to identify potential predictors of change in depression severity scores., Results: Fourteen RCTs were included in meta-analyses and 26 studies (10 RCTs and 16 open-label studies) in meta-regression. Active rTMS was significantly superior to sham treatment for reduction of severity (SMD = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.13-0.60), as well as response (OR = 3.26; 95% CI = 2.11-5.04) and remission (OR = 4.63; 95% CI = 2.24-9.55). Studies were of moderate to high quality, with funnel plots and Egger's regression test not suggestive of publication bias. In meta-regressions, higher mean age and number of sessions were significantly associated with greater improvement., Conclusions: Our results support that rTMS is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for MDD in older adults and that it should be considered in the treatment of this vulnerable population., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Mixed depression is probably different in terms of clinical course and response to treatment. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is well established in non-mixed depression, and theta-burst stimulation (TBS) protocol is replacing conventional protocols because of noninferiority and reduced delivery time. However, TBS has not been adequately studied in mixed states. This study was a double-blind, six-week, sham-controlled, and randomized clinical trial of bilateral TBS targeting the right and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, respectively. Adults with bipolar and major depressive disorder experiencing an acute mixed depression were eligible if they had not benefited from a first- or second-line treatment for acute unipolar or bipolar depression recommended by the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments. Out of 100 patients included, 90 composed modified intention-to-treat sample, which was patients that completed at least one week of the intervention. There were no significant differences in Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale score changes (least squares mean difference between groups at week 3, -0.06 [95% CI, - 3.39 to 3.51; P = 0.97] in favor of sham TBS). Response and remission rates per MADRS were also not statistically different among active and sham groups (35.7% vs. 43.7%, and 28.5% vs. 37.5% respectively at week 6, ps > 0.51). No other analyses from baseline to weeks 3 or 6 revealed significant time x group interaction or mean differences among groups in the mITT sample. Bilateral TBS targeting the DLPFC is not efficacious as an add-on treatment of acute bipolar and unipolar mixed depression. ClinicalTrials.govIdentifier: NCT04123301., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to American College of Neuropsychopharmacology.)

Background/objectives: Obesity has recently been recognized as a neurocognitive disorder involving circuits associated with the reward system and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been proposed as a strategy for the management of obesity. However, the results have been inconclusive. The aim of the current network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of different NIBS modalities for weight reduction in participants with obesity., Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining NIBS interventions in patients with obesity were analyzed using the frequentist model of NMA. The coprimary outcome was change in body mass index (BMI) and acceptability, which was calculated using the dropout rate., Results: Overall, the current NMA, consisting of eight RCTs, revealed that the high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the left DLPFC was ranked to be associated with the second-largest decrease in BMI and the largest decrease in total energy intake and craving severity, whereas the high-frequency deep TMS over bilateral DLPFC and the insula was ranked to be associated with the largest decrease in BMI., Conclusion: This pilot study provided a "signal" for the design of more methodologically robust and larger RCTs based on the findings of the potentially beneficial effect on weight reduction in participants with obesity by different NIBS interventions., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Current hypotheses on the therapeutic action of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) in psychiatric disorders build on the abundant data from neuroimaging studies. This makes NIBS a very promising tool for developing personalized interventions within a precision medicine framework. NIBS methods fundamentally vary in their neurophysiological properties. They comprise repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and its variants (e.g. theta burst stimulation - TBS) as well as different types of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), with the largest body of evidence for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). In the last two decades, significant conceptual progress has been made in terms of NIBS targets, i.e. from single brain regions to neural circuits and to functional connectivity as well as their states, recently leading to brain state modulating closed-loop approaches. Regarding structural and functional brain anatomy, NIBS meets an individually unique constellation, which varies across normal and pathophysiological states. Thus, individual constitutions and signatures of disorders may be indistinguishable at a given time point, but can theoretically be parsed along course- and treatment-related trajectories. We address precision interventions on three levels: 1) the NIBS intervention, 2) the constitutional factors of a single patient, and 3) the phenotypes and pathophysiology of illness. With examples from research on depressive disorders, we propose solutions and discuss future perspectives, e.g. individual MRI-based electrical field strength as a proxy for NIBS dosage, and also symptoms, their clusters, or biotypes instead of disorder focused NIBS. In conclusion, we propose interleaved research on these three levels along a general track of reverse and forward translation including both clinically directed research in preclinical model systems, and biomarker guided controlled clinical trials. Besides driving the development of safe and efficacious interventions, this framework could also deepen our understanding of psychiatric disorders at their neurophysiological underpinnings., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To compare cognitive effects and acceptability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and to determine whether cognitive training (CT) during rTMS or tDCS provides additional benefits., Methods: Electronic search of PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO up to 5 March 2020. We enrolled double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were acceptability and pre-post treatment changes in general cognition measured by Mini-Mental State Examination, and the secondary outcomes were memory function, verbal fluency, working memory and executive function. Durability of cognitive benefits (1, 2 and ≥3 months) after brain stimulation was examined., Results: We included 27 RCTs (n=1070), and the treatment components included high-frequency rTMS (HFrTMS) and low-frequency rTMS, anodal tDCS (atDCS) and cathodal tDCS (ctDCS), CT, sham CT and sham brain stimulation. Risk of bias of evidence in each domain was low (range: 0%-11.1%). HFrTMS (1.08, 9, 0.35-1.80) and atDCS (0.56, 0.03-1.09) had short-term positive effects on general cognition. CT might be associated with negative effects on general cognition (-0.79, -2.06 to 0.48) during rTMS or tDCS. At 1-month follow-up, HFrTMS (1.65, 0.77-2.54) and ctDCS (2.57, 0.20-4.95) exhibited larger therapeutic responses. Separate analysis of populations with pure AD and MCI revealed positive effects only in individuals with AD. rTMS and tDCS were well tolerated., Conclusions: HFrTMS is more effective than atDCS for improving global cognition, and patients with AD may have better responses to rTMS and tDCS than MCI., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Tinnitus has a prevalence of 10% to 25% and is frequently associated with numerous complications, such as neuropsychiatric disease. Traditional treatments have failed to meet the needs of patients with tinnitus. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) can focally modify cortical functioning and has been proposed as a strategy for reducing tinnitus severity. However, the results have been inconclusive., Objective: To evaluate the association between different central NIBS therapies and efficacy and acceptability for treatment of tinnitus., Data Sources: ClinicalKey, Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, ProQuest, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 4, 2019. No language restriction was applied. Manual searches were performed for potentially eligible articles selected from the reference lists of review articles and pairwise meta-analyses., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining the central NIBS method used in patients with unilateral or bilateral tinnitus were included in the current network meta-analysis. The central NIBS method was compared with sham, waiting list, or active controls. Studies that were not clinical trials or RCTs and did not report the outcome of interest were excluded., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors independently screened the studies, extracted the relevant information, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies. In cases of discrepancy, a third author became involved. If manuscript data were not available, the corresponding authors or coauthors were approached to obtain the original data. This network meta-analysis was based on the frequentist model., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in the severity of tinnitus. Secondary outcomes were changes in quality of life and the response rate related to the NIBS method in patients with tinnitus., Results: Overall, 32 unique RCTs were included with 1458 unique participants (mean female proportion, 34.4% [range, 0%-81.2%]; mean age, 49.6 [range, 40.0-62.8] years; median age, 49.8 [interquartile range, 48.1-52.4] years). The results of the network meta-analysis revealed that cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex combined with transcranial random noise stimulation over the bilateral auditory cortex was associated with the greatest improvement in tinnitus severity (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.89; 95% CI, -3.00 to -0.78) and quality of life (SMD, -1.24; 95% CI, -2.02 to -0.45) compared with the controls. Improvement in tinnitus severity ranked more favorably for continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) over both auditory cortices (SMD, -0.79; 95% CI = -1.57 to -0.01) than cTBS over only the left auditory cortex (SMD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.87 to 0.28), compared with controls. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with priming had a superior beneficial association with tinnitus severity compared with the strategies without priming. None of the investigated NIBS types had a significantly different dropout rate compared with that of the control group., Conclusions and Relevance: This network meta-analysis suggests a potential role of NIBS interventions in tinnitus management. Future large-scale RCTs focusing on longer follow-up and different priming procedure NIBS are warranted to confirm these findings.

Current first-line treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) include pharmacotherapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy. However, one-third of depressed patients do not achieve remission after multiple medication trials, and psychotherapy can be costly and time-consuming. Although non-implantable neuromodulation (NIN) techniques such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, electroconvulsive therapy, and magnetic seizure therapy are gaining momentum for treating MDD, the efficacy of non-convulsive techniques is still modest, whereas use of convulsive modalities is limited by their cognitive side effects. In this context, we propose that NIN techniques could benefit from a precision-oriented approach. In this review, we discuss the challenges and opportunities in implementing such a framework, focusing on enhancing NIN effects via a combination of individualized cognitive interventions, using closed-loop approaches, identifying multimodal biomarkers, using computer electric field modeling to guide targeting and quantify dosage, and using machine learning algorithms to integrate data collected at multiple biological levels and identify clinical responders. Though promising, this framework is currently limited, as previous studies have employed small samples and did not sufficiently explore pathophysiological mechanisms associated with NIN response and side effects. Moreover, cost-effectiveness analyses have not been performed. Nevertheless, further advancements in clinical trials of NIN could shift the field toward a more "precision-oriented" practice.

Purpose of Review: After three decades of clinical research on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), major depressive disorder (MDD) has proven to be the primary field of application. MDD poses a major challenge for health systems worldwide, emphasizing the need for improving clinical efficacy of existing rTMS applications and promoting the development of novel evidence-based rTMS treatment approaches., Recent Findings: Several promising new avenues have been proposed: novel stimulation patterns, targets, and coils; combinatory treatments and maintenance; and personalization and stratification of rTMS parameters, and treatment of subpopulations., Summary: This opinion review summarizes current knowledge in the field and addresses the future direction of rTMS treatment in MDD, facilitating the establishment of this clinical intervention method as a standard treatment option and continuing to improve response and remission rates, and take the necessary steps to personalize rTMS-based treatment approaches.

Objective: To determine whether high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) improves cognition in patients with severe traumatic brain injury., Methods: A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of rTMS was conducted in patients aged 18-60 years with chronic (>12 months postinjury) diffuse axonal injury (DAI). Patients were randomized to either a sham or real group in a 1:1 ratio. A 10-session rTMS protocol was used with 10-Hz stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Neuropsychological assessments were performed at 3 time points: at baseline, after the 10th rTMS session, and 90 days after intervention. The primary outcome was change in executive function evaluated using the Trail Making Test Part B., Results: Thirty patients with chronic DAI met the study criteria. Between-group comparisons of performance on TMT Part B at baseline and after the 10th rTMS session did not differ between groups ( p = 0.680 and p = 0.341, respectively). No significant differences were observed on other neuropsychological tests. No differences in adverse events between treatment groups were observed., Conclusions: Cognitive function in individuals with chronic DAI is not improved by high-frequency rTMS over the left DLPFC, though it appears safe and well-tolerated in this population., Clinicaltrialsgov Identifier: NCT02167971., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class II evidence that for individuals with chronic DAI, high-frequency rTMS over the left DLPFC does not significantly improve cognition., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: To compare the analgesic effects of stimulation of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) or the posterior superior insula (PSI) against sham deep (d) repetitive (r) transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with central neuropathic pain (CNP) after stroke or spinal cord injury in a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, 3-arm parallel study., Methods: Participants were randomly allocated into the active PSI-rTMS, ACC-rTMS, sham-PSI-rTMS, or sham-ACC-rTMS arms. Stimulations were performed for 12 weeks, and a comprehensive clinical and pain assessment, psychophysics, and cortical excitability measurements were performed at baseline and during treatment. The main outcome of the study was pain intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]) after the last stimulation session., Results: Ninety-eight patients (age 55.02 ± 12.13 years) completed the study. NRS score was not significantly different between groups at the end of the study. Active rTMS treatments had no significant effects on pain interference with daily activities, pain dimensions, neuropathic pain symptoms, mood, medication use, cortical excitability measurements, or quality of life. Heat pain threshold was significantly increased after treatment in the PSI-dTMS group from baseline (1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-3.06]) compared to sham-dTMS (-1.02, 95% CI -2.10 to 0.04, p = 0.014), and ACC-dTMS caused a significant decrease in anxiety scores (-2.96, 95% CI -4.1 to -1.7]) compared to sham-dTMS (-0.78, 95% CI -1.9 to 0.3; p = 0.018)., Conclusions: ACC- and PSI-dTMS were not different from sham-dTMS for pain relief in CNP despite a significant antinociceptive effect after insular stimulation and anxiolytic effects of ACC-dTMS. These results showed that the different dimensions of pain can be modulated in humans noninvasively by directly stimulating deeper SNC cortical structures without necessarily affecting clinical pain per se., Clinicaltrialsgov Identifier: NCT01932905., (© 2019 American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), are increasingly being used to treat mental disorders, particularly major depression. The aim of this comprehensive review is to summarize the main advances, limitations, and perspectives of the field., Methods: We searched PubMed and other databases from inception to July 2017 for articles, particularly systematic reviews and meta-analyses, evaluating the use of NIBS in psychiatric disorders., Results: We reviewed the mechanisms of action, safety, tolerability, efficacy, and relevant clinical parameters of NIBS. Repetitive TMS is already an established technique for the treatment of depression, and there is theoretically room for further methodological development towards a high-end therapeutic intervention. In contrast, tDCS is a technically easier method and therefore potentially suitable for wider clinical use. However the evidence of its antidepressant efficacy is less sound, and a recent study found tDCS to be inferior to antidepressant pharmacotherapy. Clinical trials using rTMS for other mental disorders produced mixed findings, whereas tDCS use has not been sufficiently appraised., Conclusion: The most promising results of NIBS have been obtained for depression. These techniques excel in safety and tolerability, although their efficacy still warrants improvement.

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique with potential for cost-effective therapeutic neuromodulation. Although positive therapeutic effects were found by stimulating the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), few studies have investigated physiological effects of DLPFC-tDCS., Objectives: To investigate effects of tDCS with different parameter settings applied to the left DLPFC on cortical responses, measured by resting-state electroencephalography (rs-EEG) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked/induced EEG responses., Methods: 22 healthy subjects underwent 5 tDCS sessions with different tDCS parameter settings in a double-blinded randomized crossover design (1: 1.5 mA, anode left-DLPFC, cathode right-DLPFC; 2: 1.5 mA, cathode left-DLPFC, anode right-DLPFC; 3: 0.5 mA, anode left-DLPFC, cathode right-DLPFC; 4: 1.5 mA, anode left-DLPFC, cathode left deltoid muscle; 5: sham stimulation). Rs-EEG and TMS-EEG were recorded before and after tDCS., Results: Rs-EEG power spectrum analysis showed no difference comparing baseline with post stimulation in any of the tDCS conditions. TMS-EEG evoked potential amplitude decreased in parietal cortex after 1.5 mA left-DLPFC anodal tDCS, and TMS-induced gamma and theta oscillations decreased after all conditions using left-DLPFC anodal tDCS. Left-DLPFC cathodal tDCS did not lead to significant change. None of the post-intervention changes was different when comparing the effects across conditions, including sham., Conclusions: Our study does not provide evidence that a single tDCS session results in significant changes in rs-EEG, using the current stimulation parameters. Significant changes in EEG responses to TMS pulses were observed following the anodal 1.5 mA tDCS interventions, although these changes were not statistically significant in a group comparison., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bipolar depression (BD) is a highly prevalent condition associated with marked cognitive deficits that persist even in the euthymic phase of the illness. Pharmacological treatments for BD might further aggravate cognitive impairment, highlighting the need of developing interventions that present cognitive safety. In this study, we evaluated the cognitive effects of H1-coil (deep) transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with treatment-resistant bipolar depression., Methods: Fourty-three patients were randomized to receive 20 sessions of active (55 trains, 18 Hz, 120% resting motor threshold intensity) or sham rTMS within a double-blind, sham-controlled trial. A battery of 20 neuropsychological assessments, grouped in 6 domains (attention and processing speed, working memory and executive function, inhibitory control, language, immediate verbal memory, and long-term verbal memory) was performed at baseline and after 4 and 8 weeks of trial onset. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression., Results: Cognitive improvement was shown for all cognitive domains. It occurred regardless of intervention group and depression improvement. For the language domain, greater improvement was observed in the sham group over time. No correlations between depression (at baseline or during treatment) and cognitive improvement were found., Limitations: Absence of healthy control group., Conclusion: The results of this exploratory study provide evidence on the cognitive safety of H1-coil TMS for BD patients. Putative pro-cognitive effects of rTMS in BD were not observed and thus should be further investigated., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although several studies indicate that placebo response is large to antidepressant pharmacotherapy in major depressive disorder (MDD), no updated meta-analysis has quantified the magnitude of the placebo (sham) response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in MDD yet., Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on this issue in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving participants with MDD; and to explore potential moderators., Methodology: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science electronic databases were searched from inception up to March 15, 2017 for RCTs that investigated the efficacy of any rTMS modality compared to sham intervention in participants with acute depressive episodes. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to estimate risks. We estimated the placebo effect size (Hedges's g, random-effects model) response using placebo groups baseline and endpoint depressive symptom scores. Meta-regressions have been employed to explore potential moderators of response., Results: Sixty-one studies met eligibility criteria (N=1328; mean age, 47years; 57% females). Placebo response was large (g=0.8, 95% CI=0.65-0.95, p<0.01) regardless of the modality of intervention. Placebo response was directly associated with publication year and depression improvement of the active group, and inversely associated with higher levels of treatment-resistant depression. Other moderators, including gender, age, and stimulator type, were not associated with the outcome. Overall, 24.6%, 67.2%, and 8.2% of studies had an overall low, unclear, and high bias risk, respectively., Conclusion: Placebo response in rTMS depression trials was large and associated with depression improvement of the active treatment group. Such result suggests that excluding placebo responders with a run-in phase may not confer advantage since response to 'active' rTMS may decrease as well. Moreover, placebo response may be a component of therapeutic response to rTMS in MDD. In addition, placebo response increase over time could indicate improvement in rTMS trial designs, including better sham rTMS methods., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Bipolar depression (BD) is a highly prevalent condition with limited therapeutic options. Deep (H1-coil) transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) is a novel TMS modality with established efficacy for unipolar depression. We conducted a randomized sham-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dTMS in treatment-resistant BD patients. Patients received 20 sessions of active or sham dTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (H1-coil, 55 18 Hz 2 s 120% MT trains). The primary outcome was changes in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) from baseline to endpoint (week 4). Secondary outcomes were changes from baseline to the end of the follow-up phase (week 8), and response and remission rates. Safety was assessed using a dTMS adverse effects questionnaire and the Young Mania Rating Scale to assess treatment-emergent mania switch (TEMS). Out of 50 patients, 43 finished the trial. There were 2 and 5 dropouts in the sham and active groups, respectively. Active dTMS was superior to sham at end point (difference favoring dTMS=4.88; 95% CI 0.43 to 9.32, p=0.03) but not at follow-up. There was also a trend for greater response rates in the active (48%) vs sham (24%) groups (OR=2.92; 95% CI=0.87 to 9.78, p=0.08). Remission rates were not statistically different. No TEMS episodes were observed. Deep TMS is a potentially effective and well-tolerated add-on therapy in resistant bipolar depressed patients receiving adequate pharmacotherapy.

Importance: Although several strategies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have been investigated as treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), their comparative efficacy and acceptability is unknown., Objective: To establish the relative efficacy and acceptability of the different modalities of rTMS used for MDD by performing a network meta-analysis, obtaining a clinically meaningful treatment hierarchy., Data Sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science were searched up until October 1, 2016., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials that compared any rTMS intervention with sham or another rTMS intervention. Trials performing less than 10 sessions were excluded., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers used standard forms for data extraction and quality assessment. Random-effects, standard pairwise, and network meta-analyses were performed to synthesize data., Main Outcomes and Measures: Response rates and acceptability (dropout rate). Remission was the secondary outcome. Effect sizes were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs., Results: Eighty-one studies (4233 patients, 59.1% women, mean age of 46 years) were included. The interventions more effective than sham were priming low-frequency (OR, 4.66; 95% CI, 1.70-12.77), bilateral (OR, 3.96; 95% CI, 2.37-6.60), high-frequency (OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.24-4.21), θ-burst stimulation (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.07-6.05), and low-frequency (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.52-3.68) rTMS. Novel rTMS interventions (accelerated, synchronized, and deep rTMS) were not more effective than sham. Except for θ-burst stimulation vs sham, similar results were obtained for remission. All interventions were at least as acceptable as sham. The estimated relative ranking of treatments suggested that priming low-frequency and bilateral rTMS might be the most efficacious and acceptable interventions among all rTMS strategies. However, results were imprecise and relatively few trials were available for interventions other than low-frequency, high-frequency, and bilateral rTMS., Conclusions and Relevance: Few differences were found in clinical efficacy and acceptability between the different rTMS modalities, favoring to some extent bilateral rTMS and priming low-frequency rTMS. These findings warrant the design of larger RCTs investigating the potential of these approaches in the short-term treatment of MDD. Current evidence cannot support novel rTMS interventions as a treatment for MDD., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: PROSPERO CRD42015019855.

Objective: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a clinically heterogeneous condition. However, the role of cortical glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor-mediated activity, implicated in MDD pathophysiology, has not been explored in different MDD subtypes. Our aim was to assess the atypical and melancholic depression subtypes regarding potential differences in GABA and glutamate receptor-mediated activity through established transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) neurophysiological measures from the motor cortex., Method: We evaluated 81 subjects free of antidepressant medication, including 21 healthy controls and 20 patients with atypical, 20 with melancholic, and 20 with undifferentiated MDD. Single and paired-pulse TMS paradigms were used to evaluate intracortical facilitation (ICF), cortical silent period (CSP), and short intracortical inhibition (SICI), which index glutamate, GABAB receptor-, and GABAA receptor-mediated activity respectively., Results: Patients with MDD demonstrated significantly decreased mean CSP values than healthy controls (Cohen's d = 0.22-0.3, P < 0.01 for all comparisons). Atypical depression presented a distinct cortical excitability pattern of decreased cortical inhibition and increased cortical facilitation, that is, an increased mean ICF and SICI ratios than other depression subtypes (d = 0.22-0.33, P < 0.01 for all comparisons)., Conclusion: Different MDD subtypes may demonstrate different neurophysiology in relation to GABAA and glutamatergic activity. TMS as an investigational tool might be useful to distinguish between different MDD subtypes., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a prevalent chronic pain syndrome with few effective therapeutic options available. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an emerging therapeutic alternative for this condition; however, results have been mixed., Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of rTMS on FM, a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis were performed., Methods: Relevant published, English and Portuguese language, randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing rTMS (irrespective of the stimulation protocol) to sham stimulation for treating FM pain intensity, depression, and/or quality of life (QoL) were identified, considering only those with low risk for bias. Trials available until April 2014 were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library Databases, and other 26 relevant medical databases covering from every continent. The outcomes for pain, depression, and QoL assessed closest to the 30th day after rTMS treatment were extracted, and changes from baseline were calculated to compare the effects of rTMS vs. placebo., Results: One hundred and sixty-three articles were screened, and five with moderate to high quality were included. rTMS improved QoL with a moderate effect size (Pooled SMD = -0.472 95%CI = -0.80 to -0.14); it showed a trend toward reducing pain intensity (SMD = -0.64 95%CI = -0.31 to 0.017), but did not change depressive symptoms., Conclusion: In comparison with sham stimulation, rTMS demonstrated superior effect on the QoL of patients with FM 1 month after starting therapy. However, further studies are needed to determine optimal treatment protocols and to elucidate the mechanisms involved with this effect, which does not seem to be mediated by changes in depression, but that may involve pain modulation. Level of evidence 1b., (© 2015 World Institute of Pain.)

Objectives: To evaluate whether the antidepressant effects of novel non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) therapies are associated with neurotrophic effects, indexed by peripheral brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels., Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis. We included trials published in PubMed/Medline from the first date available to June 2014 measuring BDNF blood levels before and after repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation or transcranial direct current stimulation in depression., Results: Eight datasets (n = 259) were included. These studies enrolled mostly treatment-resistant depression patients, who received daily stimulation sessions on the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. BDNF did not increase after NIBS (Hedges' g = 0.03, 95% CI = -0.21 to 0.27), even when examining each intervention separately. Meta-regressions did not identify the influence of any clinical and demographic predictors on the outcome. Finally, Begg's funnel plot did not suggest publication bias and results were robust according to sensitivity analysis., Conclusions: Peripheral BDNF levels do not increase after NIBS in depression. Such biomarker might, therefore, not be suitable to index NIBS antidepressant response. Further trials are needed, particularly exploring non-medicated populations, performing subsequent BDNF assessments in a larger timeframe and employing more intensive NIBS treatment protocols.

Unlabelled: Objective. Magnetic seizure therapy (MST) is a novel, experimental therapeutic intervention, which combines therapeutic aspects of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and transcranial magnetic stimulation, in order to achieve the efficacy of the former with the safety of the latter. MST might prove to be a valuable tool in the treatment of mood disorders, such as major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder. Our aim is to review current literature on MST. Methods. OVID and MEDLINE databases were used to systematically search for clinical studies on MST. The terms "magnetic seizure therapy," "depression," and "bipolar" were employed. Results. Out of 74 studies, 8 met eligibility criteria. There was considerable variability in the methods employed and samples sizes were small, limiting the generalization of the results. All studies focused on depressive episodes, but few included patients with bipolar disorder. The studies found reported significant antidepressant effects, with remission rates ranging from 30% to 40%. No significant cognitive side effects related to MST were found, with a better cognitive profile when compared to ECT., Conclusion: MST was effective in reducing depressive symptoms in mood disorders, with generally less side effects than ECT. No study focused on comparing MST to ECT on bipolar depression specifically.

Objectives: The therapeutic effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with major depression have shown promising results; however, there is a lack of mechanistic studies using biological markers (BMs) as an outcome. Therefore, our aim was to review noninvasive brain stimulation trials in depression using BMs., Methods: The following databases were used for our systematic review: MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and SCIELO. We examined articles published before November 2012 that used TMS and transcranial direct current stimulation as an intervention for depression and had BM as an outcome measure. The search was limited to human studies written in English., Results: Of 1234 potential articles, 52 articles were included. Only studies using TMS were found. Biological markers included immune and endocrine serum markers, neuroimaging techniques, and electrophysiological outcomes. In 12 articles (21.4%), end point BM measurements were not significantly associated with clinical outcomes. All studies reached significant results in the main clinical rating scales. Biological marker outcomes were used as predictors of response, to understand mechanisms of TMS, and as a surrogate of safety., Conclusions: Functional magnetic resonance imaging, single-photon emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, cortical excitability, and brain-derived neurotrophic factor consistently showed positive results. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor was the best predictor of patients' likeliness to respond. These initial results are promising; however, all studies investigating BMs are small, used heterogeneous samples, and did not take into account confounders such as age, sex, or family history. Based on our findings, we recommend further studies to validate BMs in noninvasive brain stimulation trials in MDD.

Objective: Our aim was to evaluate whether one single section of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a neuromodulatory technique that noninvasively modifies cortical excitability, could induce acute changes in the negative attentional bias in patients with major depression., Subjects and Methods: Randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, parallel design enrolling 24 age-, gender-matched, drug-free, depressed subjects. Anode and cathode were placed over the left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. We performed a word Emotional Stroop Task collecting the response times (RTs) for positive-, negative-, and neutral-related words. The emotional Stroop effect for negative vs. neutral and vs. positive words was used as the measure of attentional bias., Results: At baseline, RTs were significantly slower for negative vs. positive words. We found that active but not sham tDCS significantly modified the negative attentional bias, abolishing slower RT for negative words., Conclusion: Active but not sham tDCS significantly modified the negative attentional bias. These findings add evidence that a single tDCS session transiently induces potent changes in affective processing, which might be one of the mechanisms of tDCS underlying mood changes., (© 2013 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Patients with clinical diseases often present psychiatric conditions whose pharmacological treatment is hampered due to hazardous interactions with the clinical treatment and/or disease. This is particularly relevant for major depressive disorder, the most common psychiatric disorder in the general hospital. In this context, nonpharmacological interventions could be useful therapies; and, among those, noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) might be an interesting option. The main methods of NIBS are repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which was recently approved as a nonresearch treatment for some psychiatric conditions, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a technique that is currently limited to research scenarios but has shown promising results. Therefore, our aim was to review the main medical conditions associated with high depression rates, the main obstacles for depression treatment, and whether these therapies could be a useful intervention for such conditions. We found that depression is an important and prevalent comorbidity in a variety of diseases such as epilepsy, stroke, Parkinson's disease, myocardial infarction, cancer, and in other conditions such as pregnancy and in patients without enteral access. We found that treatment of depression is often suboptimal within the above contexts and that rTMS and tDCS therapies have been insufficiently appraised. We discuss whether rTMS and tDCS could have a significant impact in treating depression that develops within a clinical context, considering its unique characteristics such as the absence of pharmacological interactions, the use of a nonenteral route, and as an augmentation therapy for antidepressants.

Neuroimaging studies suggest that the cerebellum contributes to human cognitive processing, particularly procedural learning. This type of learning is often described as implicit learning and involves automatic, associative, and unintentional learning processes. Our aim was to investigate whether cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) influences procedural learning as measured by the serial reaction time task (SRTT), in which subjects make speeded key press responses to visual cues. A preliminary modeling study demonstrated that our electrode montage (active electrode over the cerebellum with an extra-cephalic reference) generated the maximum electric field amplitude in the cerebellum. We enrolled 21 healthy subjects (aged 20-49 years). Participants did the SRTT, a visual analogue scale and a visual attention task, before and 35 min after receiving 20-min anodal and sham cerebellar tDCS in a randomized order. To avoid carry-over effects, experimental sessions were held at least 1 week apart. For our primary outcome measure (difference in RTs for random and repeated blocks) anodal versus sham tDCS, RTs were significantly slower for sham tDCS than for anodal cerebellar tDCS (p = 0.04), demonstrating that anodal tDCS influenced implicit learning processes. When we assessed RTs for procedural learning across the one to eight blocks, we found that RTs changed significantly after anodal stimulation (interaction "time" × "blocks 1/8": anodal, p = 0.006), but after sham tDCS, they remained unchanged (p = 0.094). No significant changes were found in the other variables assessed. Our finding that anodal cerebellar tDCS improves an implicit learning type essential to the development of several motor skills or cognitive activity suggests that the cerebellum has a critical role in procedural learning. tDCS could be a new tool for improving procedural learning in daily life in healthy subjects and for correcting abnormal learning in neuropsychiatric disorders.

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising nonpharmacological therapy for major depression. In the Sertraline versus Electrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Trial (SELECT-TDCS) trial, phase-I (Brunoni et al., JAMA Psychiatry, 2013) we found that tDCS is effective for the acute episode. Here, we describe tDCS effects during phases II (crossover) and III (follow-up) of this trial (NCTs: 01149889 and 01149213)., Methods: Phase II (n = 25) was the open-label, crossover phase in which phase-I nonresponders who had received sham-tDCS received a 10-day course of active-tDCS. In phase-III (n = 42), all active-tDCS responders (>50% Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) improvement or MADRS ≤ 12) were enrolled to a 24-week, follow-up phase in which a maximum of nine tDCS sessions were performed-every other week for 3 months and, thereafter, once a month for the subsequent 3 months-sessions would be interrupted earlier whether the subject relapsed. TDCS was applied at 2 mA/30 min, with the anode over the left and the cathode over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Relapse was the outcome measure., Results: In phase-II, 52% of completers responded to tDCS. In phase-III, the mean response duration was 11.7 weeks. The survival rate per Kaplan-Meier analysis was 47%. Patients with treatment-resistant depression presented a much lower 24-week survival rate as compared to nonrefractory patients (10% vs. 77%, OR = 5.52; P < .01). Antidepressant use (sertraline 50 mg/day, eight patients) was not a predictor of relapse. TDCS was well tolerated and with few side effects., Conclusion: Continuation tDCS protocols should be optimized as to prevent relapse among tDCS responders, particularly for patients with baseline treatment-resistant depression., (© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Importance: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) trials for major depressive disorder (MDD) have shown positive but mixed results., Objective: To assess the combined safety and efficacy of tDCS vs a common pharmacological treatment (sertraline hydrochloride, 50 mg/d)., Design: Double-blind, controlled trial. Participants were randomized using a 2 × 2 factorial design to sertraline/placebo and active/sham tDCS., Setting: Outpatient, single-center academic setting in São Paulo, Brazil., Participants: One hundred twenty antidepressant-free patients with moderate to severe, nonpsychotic, unipolar MDD., Interventions: Six-week treatment of 2-mA anodal left/cathodal right prefrontal tDCS (twelve 30-minute sessions: 10 consecutive sessions once daily from Monday to Friday plus 2 extra sessions every other week) and sertraline hydrochloride (50 mg/d). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES In this intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome measure was the change in Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale score at 6 weeks (end point). We considered a difference of at least 3 points to be clinically relevant. The analysis plan was previously published. Safety was measured with an adverse effects questionnaire, the young mania rating scale, and cognitive assessment. Secondary measures were rates of clinical response and remission and scores on other scales., Results: At the main end point, there was a significant difference in Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale scores when comparing the combined treatment group (sertraline/active tDCS) vs sertraline only (mean difference, 8.5 points; 95% CI, 2.96 to 14.03; P = .002), tDCS only (mean difference, 5.9 points; 95% CI, 0.36 to 11.43; P = .03), and placebo/sham tDCS (mean difference, 11.5 points; 95% CI, 6.03 to 17.10; P < .001). Analysis of tDCS only vs sertraline only presented comparable efficacies (mean difference, 2.6 points; 95% CI, -2.90 to 8.13; P = .35). Use of tDCS only (but not sertraline only) was superior to placebo/sham tDCS. Common adverse effects did not differ between interventions, except for skin redness on the scalp in active tDCS (P = .03). There were 7 episodes of treatment-emergent mania or hypomania, 5 occurring in the combined treatment group., Conclusions and Relevance: In MDD, the combination of tDCS and sertraline increases the efficacy of each treatment. The efficacy and safety of tDCS and sertraline did not differ. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01033084.

Recent evidence has supported the notion that the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) and the sympatho-adreno-medullary (SAM) systems are modulated by cortical structures such as the prefrontal cortex. This top-down modulation may play a major role in the neuroendocrine changes associated with stressful events. We aimed to investigate further this hypothesis by modulating directly prefrontal cortex excitability using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) - a non-invasive, neuromodulatory tool that induces polarity-dependent changes in cortical excitability - and measuring effects on salivary cortisol and heart rate variability as proxies of the HPA and SAM systems. Twenty healthy participants with no clinical and neuropsychiatric conditions were randomized to receive bifrontal tDCS (left anodal/right cathodal or left cathodal/right anodal) or sham stimulation, in a within-subject design. During each stimulation session, after a resting period, subjects were shown images with neutral or negative valence. Our findings showed that excitability enhancing left anodal tDCS induced a decrease in cortisol levels. This effect is more pronounced during emotional negative stimuli. Moreover, vagal activity was higher during left anodal tDCS and emotional negative stimuli, as compared to sham stimulation and neutral images. We also observed an association between higher mood scores, higher vagal activation and lower cortisol levels for anodal stimulation. Subjective mood and anxiety evaluation revealed no specific changes after stimulation. Our findings suggest that tDCS induced transient, polarity specific modulatory top-down effects with anodal tDCS leading to a down-regulation of HPA and SAM systems. Further research using tDCS and neuroendocrine markers should explore the mechanisms of stress regulation in healthy and clinical samples., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique that delivers low-intensity, direct current to cortical areas facilitating or inhibiting spontaneous neuronal activity. In the past 10 years, tDCS physiologic mechanisms of action have been intensively investigated giving support for the investigation of its applications in clinical neuropsychiatry and rehabilitation. However, new methodologic, ethical, and regulatory issues emerge when translating the findings of preclinical and phase I studies into phase II and III clinical studies. The aim of this comprehensive review is to discuss the key challenges of this process and possible methods to address them., Methods: We convened a workgroup of researchers in the field to review, discuss, and provide updates and key challenges of tDCS use in clinical research., Main Findings/discussion: We reviewed several basic and clinical studies in the field and identified potential limitations, taking into account the particularities of the technique. We review and discuss the findings into four topics: (1) mechanisms of action of tDCS, parameters of use and computer-based human brain modeling investigating electric current fields and magnitude induced by tDCS; (2) methodologic aspects related to the clinical research of tDCS as divided according to study phase (ie, preclinical, phase I, phase II, and phase III studies); (3) ethical and regulatory concerns; and (4) future directions regarding novel approaches, novel devices, and future studies involving tDCS. Finally, we propose some alternative methods to facilitate clinical research on tDCS., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Recent therapeutic human studies testing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown promising results, although many questions remain unanswered. Translational research with experimental animals is an appropriate framework for investigating its mechanisms of action that are still undetermined. Nevertheless, animal and human studies are often discordant. Our aim was to review tDCS animal studies, examining and comparing their main findings with human studies. We performed a systematic review in Medline and other databases, screening for animal studies in vivo that delivered tDCS. Studies in vitro and using other neuromodulatory techniques were excluded. We extracted data according to Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines for reporting in vivo animal research. Thus, we collected data on sample characteristics (size, gender, weight and specimen) and methodology (experimental procedures, experimental animals, housing and husbandry, as well as analysis). We also collected data on methods for delivering tDCS (location, size, current and current density of electrodes and electrode montage), experimental effects (polarity-, intensity- and after-effects) and safety. Only 12 of 48 potentially eligible studies met our inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Quality assessment reporting was only moderate and studies were heterogeneous regarding tDCS montage methodology, position of active and reference electrodes, and current density used. Nonetheless, almost all studies demonstrated that tDCS had positive immediate and long-lasting effects. Vis-à-vis human trials, animal studies applied higher current densities (34.2 vs. 0.4 A/m(2), respectively), preferred extra-cephalic positions for reference electrodes (60% vs. 10%, respectively) and used electrodes with different sizes more often. Potential implications for translational tDCS research are discussed.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been widely tested and shown to be effective for unipolar depression. Although it has also been investigated for bipolar depression (BD), there are only few rTMS studies with BD. Here, we investigated 56 patients with BD who received rTMS treatment until remission (defined as Hamilton Depression Rating Scores < or =7). We used simple and multiple logistic regressions to identify clinical and demographic predictors associated with duration of treatment (defined as <15 vs. >15 rTMS sessions). Age, refractoriness, number of prior depressive episodes, and severe depression at baseline were associated with a longer rTMS treatment. In the multivariate analysis, refractoriness (likelihood ratio (LR) = 4.33; p < 0.01) and baseline severity (LR = 0.18, p < 0.01) remained significant predictors. Our preliminary study showed that, in remitted patients, refractoriness and severity of index episode are associated with the need of a longer rTMS treatment; providing preliminary evidence of important factors associated with rTMS parameters adjustment.

Unlabelled: The use of neuromodulation as a treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) has recently attracted renewed interest due to development of other non-pharmacological therapies besides electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS)., Method: We convened a working group of researchers to discuss the updates and key challenges of neuromodulation use for the treatment of MDD., Results: The state-of-art of neuromodulation techniques was reviewed and discussed in four sections: [1] epidemiology and pathophysiology of MDD; [2] a comprehensive overview of the neuromodulation techniques; [3] using neuromodulation techniques in MDD associated with non-psychiatric conditions; [4] the main challenges of neuromodulation research and alternatives to overcome them., Discussion: ECT is the first-line treatment for severe depression. TMS and tDCS are strategies with a relative benign profile of side effects; however, while TMS effects are comparable to antidepressant drugs for treating MDD; further research is needed to establish the role of tDCS. DBS and VNS are invasive strategies with a possible role in treatment-resistant depression. In summary, MDD is a chronic and incapacitating condition with a high prevalence; therefore clinicians should consider all the treatment options including invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation approaches.

The neural control of the cardiovascular system is a complex process that involves many structures at different levels of nervous system. Several cortical areas are involved in the control of systemic blood pressure, such as the sensorimotor cortex, the medial prefrontal cortex and the insular cortex. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques - repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) - induce sustained and prolonged functional changes of the human cerebral cortex. rTMS and tDCS has led to positive results in the treatment of some neurological and psychiatric disorders. Because experiments in animals show that cortical modulation can be an effective method to regulate the cardiovascular system, non-invasive brain stimulation might be a novel tool in the therapeutics of human arterial hypertension. We here review the experimental evidence that non-invasive brain stimulation can influence the autonomic nervous system and discuss the hypothesis that focal modulation of cortical excitability by rTMS or tDCS can influence sympathetic outflow and, eventually, blood pressure, thus providing a novel therapeutic tool for human arterial hypertension.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a novel technique of non-invasive brain stimulation which has been used to treat several neuropsychiatric disorders such as major depressive disorder, chronic pain and epilepsy. Recent studies have shown that the therapeutic effects of rTMS are associated with plastic changes in local and distant neural networks. In fact, it has been suggested that rTMS induces long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) - like effects. Besides the initial positive clinical results; the effects of rTMS are still mixed. Therefore new tools to assess the effects of plasticity non-invasively might be useful to predict its therapeutic effects and design novel therapeutic approaches using rTMS. In this paper we propose that brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) might be such a tool. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor is a neurotrophin that plays a key role in neuronal survival and synaptic strength, which has also been studied in several neuropsychiatric disorders. There is robust evidence associating BDNF with the LTP/LTD processes, and indeed it has been proposed that BNDF might index an increase or decrease of brain activity - the 'yin and yang' BDNF hypothesis. In this article, we review the initial studies combining measurements of BDNF in rTMS clinical trials and discuss the results and potential usefulness of this instrument in the field of rTMS.

Priscila Aparecida Rodrigues,1 Ana Luiza Zaninotto,1,2 Iuri Santana Neville,1 Cintya Yukie Hayashi,1 André R Brunoni,3 Manoel Jacobsen Teixeira,1 Wellingson Silva Paiva1 1Department of Neurology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; 2Laboratory of Neuromodulation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; 3Institute of Psychiatry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilCorrespondence: Priscila Aparecida RodriguesCaring - Clinic of Psychology and Neuropsychology, Avenue Vereador Narciso Yague, Guimarães, Number 1145 – Sala 1610, Mogi das Cruzes, São Paulo 08780-500, BrazilTel +55 1 199 654 2972Email pri.ar@outlook.comAbstract: Anxiety is currently one of the main mood changes and can impair the quality of life of the individual when associated with other neurological or psychiatric disorders. Neuromodulation has been highlighted as a form of treatment of several pathologies, including those involving anxiety symptoms. Among the neuromodulatory options with the potential to improve mood changes, we highlight repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). rTMS is a viable therapeutical option for neuropsychiatric dysfunctions of high prevalence and is important for the understanding of pathological and neuropsychological adaptation processes. Even with this potential, and high relevance of intervention, we observe the scarcity of literature that covers this subject. The objective of this study was to carry out a survey of the current literature, using scientific databases for the last five years. We found 32 studies reporting the effects of rTMS on anxiety, 7 on anxiety disorders and 25 on anxiety symptoms as comorbidities of neurological or psychiatric disorders. This survey suggests the need for further studies using TMS for anxiety in order to seek strategies that minimize these anxiety effects on the quality of life of the victims of this disorder.Keywords: transcranial magnetic stimulation, anxiety disorders, review, treatment