Brain stimulation · 2024
Revisiting the effects of rTMS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on pain: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhou Jie, Wang Ying, Luo Xi, Fitzgerald Paul B, Cash Robin F H, Fitzgibbon Bernadette M, Che Xianwei
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Our previous study synthesized the analgesic effects of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) trials up to 2019. There has been a significant increase in pain trials in the past few years, along with methodological variabilities such as sample size, stimulation intensity, and rTMS paradigms.
OBJECTIVES/METHODS: This study therefore updated the effects of DLPFC-rTMS on chronic pain and quantified the impact of methodological differences across studies.
RESULTS: A total of 36 studies were included. Among them, 26 studies were clinical trials (update = 9, 307/711 patients), and 10 (update = 1, 34/249 participants) were provoked pain studies. The updated meta-analysis does not support an effect on neuropathic pain after including the additional trials (pshort-term = 0.20, pmid-term = 0.50). However, there is medium-to-large analgesic effect in migraine trials extending up to six weeks follow-up (SMDmid-term = -0.80, SMDlong-term = -0.51), that was not previously reported. Methodological differences wthine the studies were considered. DLPFC-rTMS also induces potential improvement in the emotional aspects of pain (SMDshort-term = -0.28).
CONCLUSIONS: The updated systematic meta-analysis continues to support analgesic effects for chronic pain overall. However, the updated results no longer support DLPFC-rTMS for pain relief in neuropathic pain, and do supports DLPFC-rTMS in the management of migraine. There is also evidence for DLPFC-rTMS to improve emotional aspects of pain.
OBJECTIVES/METHODS: This study therefore updated the effects of DLPFC-rTMS on chronic pain and quantified the impact of methodological differences across studies.
RESULTS: A total of 36 studies were included. Among them, 26 studies were clinical trials (update = 9, 307/711 patients), and 10 (update = 1, 34/249 participants) were provoked pain studies. The updated meta-analysis does not support an effect on neuropathic pain after including the additional trials (pshort-term = 0.20, pmid-term = 0.50). However, there is medium-to-large analgesic effect in migraine trials extending up to six weeks follow-up (SMDmid-term = -0.80, SMDlong-term = -0.51), that was not previously reported. Methodological differences wthine the studies were considered. DLPFC-rTMS also induces potential improvement in the emotional aspects of pain (SMDshort-term = -0.28).
CONCLUSIONS: The updated systematic meta-analysis continues to support analgesic effects for chronic pain overall. However, the updated results no longer support DLPFC-rTMS for pain relief in neuropathic pain, and do supports DLPFC-rTMS in the management of migraine. There is also evidence for DLPFC-rTMS to improve emotional aspects of pain.