Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026
Neuronavigation‑guided rTMS of the facial motor cortex for atypical facial pain: Two case reports.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Xiao Dongsheng, Tao Wei, Li Yongjie, Balbi Matilde, Zhang Yuqing
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate safety and analgesic effect of neuronavigation-guided 10 Hz rTMS precisely targeting facial M1 in atypical facial pain (AFP).
METHODS: Two adults with refractory AFP received 10 daily sessions (2,500 pulses/day) of 10 Hz rTMS at 110 % resting motor threshold. Targeting used MRI/CT-integrated neuronavigation to the facial M1. Pain severity (Barrow Neurological Institute [BNI] scale I-V) and adverse events were recorded through treatment and short follow-up.
RESULTS: Both completed treatment without serious adverse events. Case 1 improved from BNI V at baseline to II at end of treatment, persisting BNI III for 15 days. Case 2 improved from BNI IV to I, with BNI III for 2 days after therapy; both reported better sleep and mood.
CONCLUSIONS: Neuronavigation-guided 10 Hz rTMS of facial M1 was well tolerated and associated with rapid, clinically meaningful analgesia in two AFP cases.
SIGNIFICANCE: Pilot data support sham-controlled studies to define dose-response and durability, identify responders, and formalize navigated rTMS as a physiological screen to select candidates and targets for implanted brain stimulations.
METHODS: Two adults with refractory AFP received 10 daily sessions (2,500 pulses/day) of 10 Hz rTMS at 110 % resting motor threshold. Targeting used MRI/CT-integrated neuronavigation to the facial M1. Pain severity (Barrow Neurological Institute [BNI] scale I-V) and adverse events were recorded through treatment and short follow-up.
RESULTS: Both completed treatment without serious adverse events. Case 1 improved from BNI V at baseline to II at end of treatment, persisting BNI III for 15 days. Case 2 improved from BNI IV to I, with BNI III for 2 days after therapy; both reported better sleep and mood.
CONCLUSIONS: Neuronavigation-guided 10 Hz rTMS of facial M1 was well tolerated and associated with rapid, clinically meaningful analgesia in two AFP cases.
SIGNIFICANCE: Pilot data support sham-controlled studies to define dose-response and durability, identify responders, and formalize navigated rTMS as a physiological screen to select candidates and targets for implanted brain stimulations.