Antidepressant effects of augmentative transcranial magnetic stimulation: randomised multicentre trial

Optimally combining transcranial magnetic stimulation with antidepressants in major depressive disorder: A systematic review and Meta-analysis

There is a critical knowledge gap in optimally combining transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and antidepressants to treat patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). TMS is effective in treating MDD in patients who have failed at least one antidepressant trial, with accelerated protocols showing faster remission in treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Although clinicians routinely augment antidepressants with TMS, there is a knowledge gap in stopping versus continuing antidepressants or the dosing strategies when starting or tapering TMS. These considerations are important when considering maintenance TMS (delivered alone or in combination with suitable antidepressants) to maintain remission in MDD after the index course of TMS. As the first step towards filling this knowledge gap, we reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and open-label trials from 2 databases (PubMed/Medline and EMBASE) that compared active TMS combined with a pre-specified antidepressant dosed in the same manner for adults with MDD versus sham TMS combined with the same antidepressant as in the active arm. All studies were published between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2023. We excluded case reports, case series, and clinical studies that augmented TMS with antidepressants and vice versa. We found 10 RCTs (n = 654 participants) and performed a meta-analysis. This showed active TMS combined with pre-specified antidepressants had greater efficacy for MDD treatment than sham TMS combined with the same antidepressants as in the active arm (Hedge's g = 1; 95 % CI [0.27, 1.73]). The review and meta-analysis indicate greater short-term efficacy in combining antidepressants with TMS from the get-go in MDD. Given the increasing role of accelerated TMS protocols in expediting remission in MDD and the results of our meta-analysis, we advocate for RCTs examining the short-term and long-term effects of various antidepressant classes on these TMS protocols in MDD. This can also optimize and individualize maintenance TMS protocols to prevent relapse in MDD.

A Review of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Medication and Psychotherapy for Depression

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After participating in this CME activity, the psychiatrist should be better able to:• Compare and contrast therapies used in combination with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for treating MDD.

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive neuromodulation, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), has emerged as a major area for treating major depressive disorder (MDD). This review has two primary aims: (1) to review the current literature on combining TMS and tDCS with other therapies, such as psychotherapy and psychopharmacological interventions, and (2) to discuss the efficacy, feasibility, limitations, and future directions of these combined treatments for MDD.

METHOD

This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched three databases: PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Library. The last search date was December 5, 2023.

RESULTS

The initial search revealed 2,519 records. After screening and full-text review, 58 studies (7 TMS plus psychotherapy, 32 TMS plus medication, 7 tDCS plus psychotherapy, 12 tDCS plus medication) were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature on tDCS and TMS paired with psychotherapy provides initial support for integrating mindfulness interventions with both TMS and tDCS. Adding TMS or tDCS to stable doses of ongoing medications can decrease MDD symptoms; however, benzodiazepines may interfere with TMS and tDCS response, and antipsychotics can interfere with TMS response. Pairing citalopram with TMS and sertraline with tDCS can lead to greater MDD symptom reduction compared to using these medications alone. Future studies need to enroll larger samples, include randomized controlled study designs, create more uniform protocols for combined treatment delivery, and explore mechanisms and predictors of change.

Efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation combined with antidepressant medications for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants, noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS), and their combination are commonly used in routine clinical practice. Nevertheless, there is a continuous dispute regarding whether the effectiveness of NIBS in combination with antidepressants exceeds that of antidepressants alone. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the existing evidence and draw a definitive conclusion on this issue.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of five databases: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, SinoMed, and the Cochrane Database of Randomized Controlled Trials. The search was conducted until October 6, 2023. The primary outcomes were the pre- and post-intervention depression and anxiety scores. Secondary outcomes included dropout rates, response rates, and certain levels of neurotransmitters [ 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT), dopamine (DA), and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)] at the end of the intervention. Subgroup, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the sources of heterogeneity. The data were analysed using R 4.2.2.

RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs [1357 participants; 11 studies used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and 7 studies used transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)]. The follow-up duration varied from two weeks to three months. Overall, whether in combination with rTMS or tDCS, antidepressants proved more effective in alleviating depressive symptoms compared to when used as monotherapy. However, this advantage was not evident during the follow-up period. (p > 0.05). And the combination's efficacy in improving anxiety was found to be lacking. Post-treatment serum levels of 5-HT, DA, and GABA were higher in the rTMS group were higher than antidepressant medication group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, subgroup analysis results indicated that only the rTMS + antidepressant medication treatment significantly improved remission and remission rates. The meta-regression results showed that the type of antidepressant and the sex of the participants had a significant association with the depression score.

CONCLUSION

Combination treatment with NIBS was significantly more effective in improving depression symptoms than medication alone. rTMS combined with antidepressants appears to be more effective in improving response and remission rates. However, efficacy may be influenced by the type of medicine used in combination, and long-term efficacy data is lacking.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023388259.

Individualized brain mapping for navigated neuromodulation

ABSTRACT

The brain is a complex organ that requires precise mapping to understand its structure and function. Brain atlases provide a powerful tool for studying brain circuits, discovering biological markers for early diagnosis, and developing personalized treatments for neuropsychiatric disorders. Neuromodulation techniques, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation, have revolutionized clinical therapies for neuropsychiatric disorders. However, the lack of fine-scale brain atlases limits the precision and effectiveness of these techniques. Advances in neuroimaging and machine learning techniques have led to the emergence of stereotactic-assisted neurosurgery and navigation systems. Still, the individual variability among patients and the diversity of brain diseases make it necessary to develop personalized solutions. The article provides an overview of recent advances in individualized brain mapping and navigated neuromodulation and discusses the methodological profiles, advantages, disadvantages, and future trends of these techniques. The article concludes by posing open questions about the future development of individualized brain mapping and navigated neuromodulation.

Comparing different non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for bipolar depression treatment: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a promising treatment for bipolar depression. We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials on NIBS for treating bipolar depression (INPLASY No: 202340019). Eighteen articles (N = 617) were eligible for network meta-analysis. Effect sizes were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over F3 plus cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation over F4 (a-tDCS-F3 +c-tDCS-F4; SMD = -1.18, 95%CIs = -1.66 to -0.69, N = 77), high-definition tDCS over F3 (HD-tDCS-F3; -1.17, -2.00 to -0.35, 25), high frequency deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-dTMS; -0.81, -1.62 to -0.001, 25), and high frequency repetitive TMS over F3 plus low frequency repetitive TMS over F4 (HF-rTMS-F3 +LF-rTMS-F4; -0.77, -1.43 to -0.11, 38) significantly improved depressive symptoms compared to sham controls. Only a-tDCS-F3 +c-tDCS-F4 (OR = 4.53, 95%CIs = 1.51-13.65) and HF-rTMS-F3 +LF-rTMS-F4 (4.69, 1.02-21.56) showed higher response rates. No active NIBS interventions exhibited significant differences in dropout or side effect rates, compared with sham controls.

In-vivoverified anatomically aware deep learning for real-time electric field simulation

Objective.Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a prominent non-invasive technique for modulating brain function and treating mental disorders. By generating a high-precision magnetically evoked electric field (E-field) using a TMS coil, it enables targeted stimulation of specific brain regions. However, current computational methods employed for E-field simulations necessitate extensive preprocessing and simulation time, limiting their fast applications in the determining the optimal coil placement.Approach.We present an attentional deep learning network to simulate E-fields. This network takes individual magnetic resonance images and coil configurations as inputs, firstly transforming the images into explicit brain tissues and subsequently generating the local E-field distribution near the target brain region. Main results. Relative to the previous deep-learning simulation method, the presented method reduced the mean relative error in simulated E-field strength of gray matter by 21.1%, and increased the correlation between regional E-field strengths and corresponding electrophysiological responses by 35.0% when applied into another dataset.In-vivoTMS experiments further revealed that the optimal coil placements derived from presented method exhibit comparable stimulation performance on motor evoked potentials to those obtained using computational methods. The simplified preprocessing and increased simulation efficiency result in a significant reduction in the overall time cost of traditional TMS coil placement optimization, from several hours to mere minutes.Significance.The precision and efficiency of presented simulation method hold promise for its application in determining individualized coil placements in clinical practice, paving the way for personalized TMS treatments.

[Movement as a Neuromodulator: How Physical Activity Influences the Physiology of Adolescent Depression]

Movement as a Neuromodulator: How Physical Activity Influences the Physiology of Adolescent Depression Abstract: In the context of adolescent depression, physical activity is becoming increasingly recognized for its positive effects on neuropathology. Current scientific findings indicate that physical training affects the biological effects of depression during adolescence. Yet the pathophysiology of adolescent depression is not yet fully understood. Besides psychosocial and genetic influences, various neurobiological factors are being discussed. One explanation model describes a dysfunction of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA axis) with a sustained elevation in cortisol concentration. Recent studies highlight neuroimmunological processes and a reduced concentration of growth factors as causative factors. These changes appear to lead to a dysregulation of the excitation and inhibition balance of the cerebral cortex as well as to cerebral morphological alterations. Regular physical training can potentially counteract the dysregulation of the HPA axis and normalize cortisol levels. The release of proinflammatory cytokines is inhibited, and the expression of growth factors involved in adult neurogenesis is stimulated. One should ensure the synergistic interaction of biological and psychosocial factors when designing the exercise schedule (endurance or strength training, group or individual sports, frequency, duration, and intensity). Addressing these open questions is essential when integrating physical activity into the guidelines for treating depressive disorders in children and adolescents.

rTMS in mental health disorders

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an innovative and non-invasive technique used in the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric and neurological disorders. Repetitive TMS (rTMS) can modulate neuronal activity, neuroplasticity and arousal of the waking and sleeping brain, and, more generally, overall mental health. Numerous studies have examined the predictors of the efficacy of rTMS on clinical outcome variables in various psychiatric disorders. These predictors often encompass the stimulated brain region's location, electroencephalogram (EEG) activity patterns, potential morphological and neurophysiological anomalies, and individual patient's response to treatment. Most commonly, rTMS is used in awake patients with depression, catatonia, and tinnitus. Interestingly, rTMS has also shown promise in inducing slow-wave oscillations in insomnia patients, opening avenues for future research into the potential beneficial effects of these oscillations on reports of non-restorative sleep. Furthermore, neurophysiological measures emerge as potential, disease-specific biomarkers, aiding in predicting treatment response and monitoring post-treatment changes. The study posits the convergence of neurophysiological biomarkers and individually tailored rTMS treatments as a gateway to a new era in psychiatric care. The potential of rTMS to induce slow-wave activity also surfaces as a significant contribution to personalized treatment approaches. Further investigations are called for to validate the imaging and electrophysiological biomarkers associated with rTMS. In conclusion, the potential for rTMS to significantly redefine treatment strategies through personalized approaches could enhance the outcomes in neuropsychiatric disorders.

Association between daily dose and efficacy of rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depression: A meta-analysis

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a well-established, safe, and effective brain stimulation technique for depression; however, uniform parameters have not been used in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to identify the parameters that affect rTMS effectiveness and ascertain the range in which that parameter has optimal efficacy. A meta-analysis of sham-controlled trials using rTMS delivered over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in depression was conducted. In the meta-regression and subgroup analyses, all rTMS stimulation parameters were extracted and their association with efficacy was investigated. Of the 17,800 references, 52 sham-controlled trials were included. Compared to sham controls, our results demonstrated a significant improvement in depressive symptoms at the end of treatment. According to the results of meta-regression, the number of pulses and sessions per day correlated with rTMS efficacy; however, the positioning method, stimulation intensity, frequency, number of treatment days, and total pulses did not. Furthermore, subgroup analysis revealed that the efficacy was correspondingly better in the group with higher daily pulses. In clinical practice, increasing the number of daily pulses and sessions may improve the effectiveness of rTMS.

A Systematic Review Assessing Patient-Related Predictors of Response to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Major Depressive Disorder

Objective

The safety and efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the acute treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is well established. However, it is not well understood which patient-related factors are associated with a more robust antidepressant response. Identifying predictive factors for therapeutic response to TMS treatment in depression will guide clinicians in patient selection.

Methods

By systematic review of clinical trial data, the current study aims to identify and analyze reported patient-specific predictors of response to an acute course of TMS treatment for MDD. PubMed was searched for randomized controlled trials of TMS for patients with depression. Studies were appraised for risk of bias using components recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Results

TMS data were available from 375 studies, 18 of which were included in this review. Treatment response is inversely associated with treatment refractoriness and age.

Conclusion

Inadequate sample size and large heterogeneity in study parameters among clinical trials limit any strong conclusions from being drawn; nonetheless, despite these limitations, there is mounting evidence, which points to age and treatment refractoriness as candidate variables for predicting clinical outcome. Implications of these findings for treatment of MDD are discussed.

A Different rTMS Protocol for a Different Type of Depression: 20.000 rTMS Pulses for the Treatment of Bipolar Depression Type II

In this open-label naturalistic study, we assess the feasibility, tolerability, and effectiveness of a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol with a reduced total pulse number for treating patients suffering from bipolar disorder type II. All patients received one rTMS treatment session of 1000 pulses for 20 consecutive working days, accumulating to 20.000 rTMS pulses applied over 4 weeks. We measured the patients’ symptoms before the start, halfway through, directly after, and one month after treatment. We quantified the depression symptoms using both the Beck depression inventory scale and the symptom checklist-90 depression subscale. Patients showed a significant reduction in depression symptoms directly after treatment and an even further reduction one month after treatment. The remission rates were at 26% halfway through treatment (after the 10th session), 61% directly after treatment (after the 20th session), and increased to 78% at the 1-month follow-up. Importantly, the protocol proved to be feasible and highly tolerable in this patient population, with no adverse effects being reported. Considering these positive results, further research should focus on replicating these findings in larger clinical samples with control groups and longer follow-up periods, while potentially adding maintenance sessions to optimize the treatment effect and stability for bipolar disorder type II patients.

Evidence and expert consensus based German guidelines for the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in depression

INTRODUCTION

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) offer a promising alternative to psychotherapeutic and pharmacological treatments for depression. This paper aims to present a practical guide for its clinical implementation based on evidence from the literature as well as on the experience of a group of leading German experts in the field.

METHODS

The current evidence base for the use of rTMS in depression was examined via review of the literature. From the evidence and from clinical experience, recommendations for the use of rTMS in clinical practice were derived. All members of the of the German Society for Brain Stimulation in Psychiatry and all members of the sections Clinical Brain Stimulation and Experimental Brain Stimulation of the German Society for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Mental Health were invited to participate in a poll on whether they consent with the recommendations.

FINDINGS

Among rTMS experts, a high consensus rate could be identified for clinical practice concerning the setting and the technical parameters of rTMS treatment in depression, indications and contra-indications, the relation of rTMS to other antidepressive treatment modalities and the frequency and management of side effects.

Comparative Efficacy and Acceptability of 3 Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Devices for Depression: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been employed worldwide for therapy-resistant depression. The Food and Drug Administration has approved a number of therapeutic devices for treating major depressive disorder; however, no studies have examined the differences in efficacy and acceptability among commercially available stimulation devices. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of 3 stimulation devices (NeuroStar, MagPro, and Magstim) for depressive disorders.

METHODS

Our study included 31 randomized sham-controlled trials of high-frequency rTMS included in the network meta-analysis by Brunoni. We calculated the risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals, comparing each device with sham for the endpoints of response rate, remission rate, and all-cause discontinuation. We then analyzed the differences among the devices in effect size for those endpoints.

RESULTS

After determining the effect sizes for the endpoints, we found no statistically significant subgroup differences in the response rates, all-cause discontinuation, or remission rates among the devices (p = 0.12, p = 0.84, and p = 0.07, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest similar efficacy and acceptability for the 3 stimulation devices. Future studies need to perform head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy and acceptability of the stimulation devices for treating depression using the same stimulation protocols.

Prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation for depression in US military veterans - A naturalistic cohort study in the veterans health administration

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an evidence-based treatment for pharmacoresistant major depressive disorder (MDD), however, the evidence in veterans has been mixed. To this end, VA implemented a nationwide TMS program that included evaluating clinical outcomes within a naturalistic design. TMS was hypothesized to be safe and provide clinically meaningful reductions in MDD and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were MDD diagnosis and standard clinical TMS eligibility. Of the 770 patients enrolled between October 2017 and March 2020, 68.4% (n = 521) met threshold-level PTSD symptom criteria. Treatments generally used standard parameters (e.g., left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, 120% motor threshold, 10 Hz, 3000 pulses/treatment). Adequate dose was operationally defined as 30 sessions. MDD and PTSD symptoms were measured using the 9-item patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) and PTSD checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), respectively.

RESULTS

Of the 770 who received at least one session, TMS was associated with clinically meaningful (Cohen's d>1.0) and statistically significant (all p<.001) reductions in MDD and PTSD. Of the 340 veterans who received an adequate dose, MDD response and remission rates were 41.4% and 20%, respectively. In veterans with comorbid PTSD, 65.3% demonstrated clinically meaningful reduction and 46.1% no longer met PTSD threshold criteria after TMS. Side effects were consistent with the known safety profile of TMS.

LIMITATIONS

Include those inherent to retrospective observational cohort study in Veterans.

CONCLUSIONS

These multisite, large-scale data supports the effectiveness and safety of TMS for veterans with MDD and PTSD using standard clinical approaches.

Using Brain Imaging to Improve Spatial Targeting of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Depression

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an effective treatment for depression but is limited in that the optimal therapeutic target remains unknown. Early TMS trials lacked a focal target and thus positioned the TMS coil over the prefrontal cortex using scalp measurements. Over time, it became clear that this method leads to variation in the stimulation site and that this could contribute to heterogeneity in antidepressant response. Newer methods allow for precise positioning of the TMS coil over a specific brain location, but leveraging these precise methods requires a more precise therapeutic target. We review how neuroimaging is being used to identify a more focal therapeutic target for depression. We highlight recent studies showing that more effective TMS targets in the frontal cortex are functionally connected to deep limbic regions such as the subgenual cingulate cortex. We review how connectivity might be used to identify an optimal TMS target for use in all patients and potentially even a personalized target for each individual patient. We address the clinical implications of this emerging field and highlight critical questions for future research.

Profiling rTMS: A critical response

This article is a detailed response to the criticisms levelled by the authors of an accompanying viewpoint, which claims that the positioning of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the 2020 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) clinical practice guidelines for the management mood disorders (MDcpg²⁰²⁰) is incorrect. We, the authors of the MDcpg²⁰²⁰, strongly refute these assertions and argue that first we have determined the positioning of rTMS using the same criteria as those applied to other treatments for depression. Second, in accordance with National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) guidelines, the processes by which we have developed the MDcpg²⁰²⁰ have been guided by best practice and have been overseen throughout by the RANZCP. Third, our objective and detailed examination of the relevant research has shown that the evidence needed to support the positioning of rTMS alongside standard therapies for depression is severely deficient. And therefore, as a consequence, we set out clearly both our logic and reasoning with respect to interpreting rTMS data and outline our evidence-informed position in which rTMS remains a potential alternative therapy that can be considered in certain clinical circumstances once both suitable psychological and pharmacological treatments have been trialled. We also discuss why, until further research is conducted, rTMS is perhaps best regarded as an experimental therapy and an investigational tool, and to assist in this regard, we propose a framework for consideration by those conducting rTMS studies in the future. Thus, based on current knowledge, we conclude that rTMS does not have a sufficient evidence base to warrant recognition as a standard therapy for depression alongside established treatments such as psychological interventions, pharmacotherapy, and electroconvulsive therapy. Furthermore, there is no clinical profile for depressed patients that might benefit from rTMS and therefore tolerability alone is not good enough reason to promote rTMS in the management of major depression.

Treatment effect variability in brain stimulation across psychiatric disorders: A meta-analysis of variance

Noninvasive brain stimulation methods such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are promising add-on treatments for a number of psychiatric conditions. Yet, some of the initial excitement is wearing off. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) have found inconsistent results. This inconsistency is suspected to be the consequence of variation in treatment effects and solvable by identifying responders in RCTs and individualizing treatment. However, is there enough evidence from RCTs that patients respond differently to treatment? This question can be addressed by comparing the variability in the active stimulation group with the variability in the sham group. We searched MEDLINE/PubMed and included all double-blinded, sham-controlled RCTs and crossover trials that used TMS or tDCS in adults with a unipolar or bipolar depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia spectrum disorder, or obsessive compulsive disorder. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines to ensure data quality and validity, we extracted a measure of variability of the primary outcome. A total of 130 studies with 5748 patients were considered in the analysis. We calculated variance-weighted variability ratios for each comparison of active stimulation vs sham and entered them into a random-effects model. We hypothesized that treatment effect variability in TMS or tDCS would be reflected by increased variability after active compared with sham stimulation, or in other words, a variability ratio greater than one. Across diagnoses, we found only a minimal increase in variability after active stimulation compared with sham that did not reach statistical significance (variability ratio = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.97, 1.08, P = 0.358). In conclusion, this study found little evidence for treatment effect variability in brain stimulation, suggesting that the need for personalized or stratified medicine is still an open question.

The efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has established efficacy in the treatment of unipolar depression and a growing evidence base in the treatment of bipolar depression. The objective of this study was to provide an estimate of the efficacy of rTMS in bipolar depression as an up to date synthesis of this literature is lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the sham-controlled randomized controlled trial (RCT) literature examining rTMS in bipolar depression. Studies were included if they included participants with bipolar depression in both sham- and active arms. The primary outcome parameter was rate of clinical response, defined as a 50% reduction as compared to baseline, on an established depression rating scale. Quantitative synthesis was performed using the Maentel-Haenszel random-effects model.

RESULTS

Data from a total of 274 patients from 14 studies were retained in the quantitative synthesis. The response rates were higher in rTMS compared to sham treatment (odds ratio (OR) = 2.72. 95%CI: 1.44-5.14). When stimulation protocols were analysed separately, statistically significant clinical response was only observed for high-frequency rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (OR = 2.57, 95%CI: 1.17-5.66).

LIMITATIONS

Most data was extracted from trials including very few participants with bipolar depression (predominantly unipolar depression samples). Large confirmatory RCTs of rTMS specifically for bipolar depression are lacking.

CONCLUSION

rTMS seems effective in the treatment of bipolar depression, but dedicated and adequately powered RCTs are needed in order to firmly conclude that rTMS should be offered routinely for the treatment of bipolar depression.

Bifrontal high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation is not effective as an add-on treatment in depression

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are linked to dysfunction in prefrontal cortical areas. Hence, non-invasive neurostimulation of the prefrontal cortex has demonstrated antidepressant efficacy. In the present study, we investigated the efficacy of high frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (hf-tRNS) as an add-on treatment for depression in a sham-controlled randomized trial.

METHODS

Forty in-patients with depression were randomized and treated with real or sham hf-tRNS (100-650 Hz) with 0 mA offset. The electrodes were mounted over the left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (primary outcome), the Major Depression Inventory, the Clinical Global Impression scale and the Global Assessment of Functioning scale were used for assessment at baseline, after 3 weeks of intervention (end of treatment), and 9 weeks after intervention. Safety parameters included cognitive functioning and reported side-effects.

RESULTS

Comparison of real and sham treatment at the planned interim analysis showed an amelioration of symptoms in both groups for all outcomes with numeric but not statistically significant superiority of the sham arm for the primary outcome. Thus, the study was terminated prematurely after an interim analysis. There were no systematic differences with respect to safety parameters.

LIMITATIONS

The negative finding might be related to the specific stimulation parameters used in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that prefrontal hf-tRNS is safe but not effective as an add-on treatment of depression. The challenge for future studies employing transcranial electric stimulation remains to identify effective stimulation parameters for the treatment of depression.

Low-frequency rTMS inhibits the anti-depressive effect of ECT. A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the prefrontal cortex has been shown to have a statistically and clinically significant anti-depressant effect. The present pilot study was carried out to investigate if right prefrontal low-frequency rTMS as an add-on to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) accelerates the anti-depressant effect and reduces cognitive side effects.

METHODS

In this randomised, controlled, double-blind study, thirty-five patients with major depression were allocated to ECT+placebo or ECT+low-frequency right prefrontal rTMS. The severity of depression was evaluated during the course using the Hamilton scale for depression (the 17-item as well as the 6-item scale) and the major depression inventory (MDI). Furthermore, neuropsychological assessment of cognitive function was carried out.

RESULTS

The study revealed no significant difference between the two groups for any of the outcomes, but with a visible trend to lower scores for MDI after treatment in the placebo group. The negative impact of ECT on neurocognitive functions was short-lived, and scores on logical memory were significantly improved compared to baseline 4 weeks after last treatment. The ECT-rTMS group revealed generally less impairment of cognitive functions than the ECT-placebo group.

CONCLUSION

The addition of low-frequency rTMS as an add-on to ECT treatment did not result in an accelerated response. On the contrary, the results suggest that low-frequency rTMS could inhibit the anti-depressant effect of ECT.

Non-invasive stimulation in the social brain: the methodological challenges

Use of non-invasive brain stimulation methods (NIBS) has become a common approach to study social processing in addition to behavioural, imaging and lesion studies. However, research using NIBS to investigate social processing faces challenges. Overcoming these is important to allow valid and reliable interpretation of findings in neurotypical cohorts, but also to allow us to tailor NIBS protocols to atypical groups with social difficulties. In this review, we consider the utility of brain stimulation as a technique to study and modulate social processing. We also discuss challenges that face researchers using NIBS to study social processing in neurotypical adults with a view to highlighting potential solutions. Finally, we discuss additional challenges that face researchers using NIBS to study and modulate social processing in atypical groups. These are important to consider given that NIBS protocols are rarely tailored to atypical groups before use. Instead, many rely on protocols designed for neurotypical adults despite differences in brain function that are likely to impact response to NIBS.

Hamilton scale and MADRS are interchangeable in meta-analyses but can disagree at trial level

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Major depressive disorder is a multidimensional disease, in which demonstrating the efficacy of treatments is difficult. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) cover different domains but are used interchangeably as primary measures of the outcome in trials and-with standardized measures-in meta-analyses. We aimed at understanding (i) whether the choice of the outcome measurement tool can influence the outcome of a trial, and if so, (ii) whether one systematically outperforms the other, and (iii) whether using standardized measures of the effect in meta-analysis is justified.

METHODS

Short-term randomized trials in patients with major depressive disorder that used both the scales were systematically searched and the results were collected. To quantify the differences in the results-both in terms of the standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) for response-and their range, data were analyzed and plotted with the Bland-Altman method.

RESULTS

161 comparisons from 80 studies were included, involving a total of 18,189 patients. Neither of the two scales appears systematically more sensitive to the treatment effect than the other in terms of SMDs (P-value = 0.06, 95% CI -0.044 to 0.001) or ORs (P-value = 0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.04). However, the variability of differences between the HRSD and MADRS largely depends on the number of patients included in the comparison.

CONCLUSION

No systematic differences between the two scales were found supporting the use of standardized measures in meta-analyses. However, the same trial may give very different results with either scale, especially in small trials. Further research is needed to understand the causes of this variability.

Trends of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation From 2009 to 2018: A Bibliometric Analysis

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) technology, which is amongst the most used non-invasive brain stimulation techniques currently available, has developed rapidly from 2009 to 2018. However, reports on the trends of rTMS using bibliometric analysis are rare. The goal of the present bibliometric analysis is to analyze and visualize the trends of rTMS, including general (publication patterns) and emerging trends (research frontiers), over the last 10 years by using the visual analytic tool CiteSpace V. Publications related to rTMS from 2009 to 2018 were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) database, including 2,986 peer-reviewed articles/reviews. Active authors, journals, institutions, and countries were identified by WoS and visualized by CiteSpace V, which could also detect burst changes to identify emerging trends. GraphPad Prism 8 was used to analyze the time trend of annual publication outputs. The USA ranked first in this field. Pascual-Leone A (author A), Fitzgerald PB (author B), George MS (author C), Lefaucheur JP (author D), and Fregni F (author E) made great contributions to this field of study. The most prolific institution to publish rTMS-related publications in the last decade was the University of Toronto. The journal Brain Stimulation published most papers. Lefaucheur et al.'s paper in 2014, and the keyword "sham controlled trial" showed the strongest citation bursts by the end of 2018, which indicates increased attention to the underlying work, thereby indicating the research frontiers. This study reveals the publication patterns and emerging trends of rTMS based on the records published from 2009 to 2018. The insights obtained have reference values for the future research and application of rTMS.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined with Antidepressants for the First Episode of Major Depressive Disorder

Objectives

The aims of this study were to systematically review the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with antidepressants in the treatment of the first major depressive disorder (MDD) episode.

Materials and Methods

The primary efficacious outcome was the pooled mean-endpoint scores of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). Rates of response, remission rate, overall discontinuation and discontinuation due to adverse events were also evaluated. Search in the Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases for interesting outcomes was carried out in March 2018.

Results

A total of 108 randomized patients of two randomized controlled trials were included in this study. The pooled mean- endpoint scores of the HAMD in one, two, and four weeks for rTMS plus antidepressants (citalopram or paroxetine) were greater than that of sham plus the antidepressants. The pooled rates of overall discontinuation and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were not different between the two groups.

Conclusion

According to a piece of limited evidence, the high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) could accelerate the antidepressant effect of SSRIs in young patients with a first-episode major depressive disorder. However, the acceptability and tolerability of HF-rTMS in the treatment of such patients are no better than an antidepressant alone. However, further well-defined and large sample-size studies of HF-rTMS combined with an antidepressant in MDD should be carried out to warrant these results.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): An update (2014-2018)

A group of European experts reappraised the guidelines on the therapeutic efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) previously published in 2014 [Lefaucheur et al., Clin Neurophysiol 2014;125:2150-206]. These updated recommendations take into account all rTMS publications, including data prior to 2014, as well as currently reviewed literature until the end of 2018. Level A evidence (definite efficacy) was reached for: high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the painful side for neuropathic pain; HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) using a figure-of-8 or a H1-coil for depression; low-frequency (LF) rTMS of contralesional M1 for hand motor recovery in the post-acute stage of stroke. Level B evidence (probable efficacy) was reached for: HF-rTMS of the left M1 or DLPFC for improving quality of life or pain, respectively, in fibromyalgia; HF-rTMS of bilateral M1 regions or the left DLPFC for improving motor impairment or depression, respectively, in Parkinson's disease; HF-rTMS of ipsilesional M1 for promoting motor recovery at the post-acute stage of stroke; intermittent theta burst stimulation targeted to the leg motor cortex for lower limb spasticity in multiple sclerosis; HF-rTMS of the right DLPFC in posttraumatic stress disorder; LF-rTMS of the right inferior frontal gyrus in chronic post-stroke non-fluent aphasia; LF-rTMS of the right DLPFC in depression; and bihemispheric stimulation of the DLPFC combining right-sided LF-rTMS (or continuous theta burst stimulation) and left-sided HF-rTMS (or intermittent theta burst stimulation) in depression. Level A/B evidence is not reached concerning efficacy of rTMS in any other condition. The current recommendations are based on the differences reached in therapeutic efficacy of real vs. sham rTMS protocols, replicated in a sufficient number of independent studies. This does not mean that the benefit produced by rTMS inevitably reaches a level of clinical relevance.

Modulation of I-wave generating pathways by theta-burst stimulation: a model of plasticity induction

KEY POINTS

Mechanisms underlying plasticity induction by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols such as intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) remain poorly understood. Individual response to iTBS is associated with recruitment of late indirect wave (I-wave) generating pathways that can be probed by the onset latency of transcranial magnetic stimulation applied to primary motor cortex (M1) at different coil orientations. We found an association between late I-wave recruitment [reflected by anterior-posterior (AP)-lateromedial (LM) latency; i.e. the excess latency of motor-evoked potentials generated by transcranial magnetic stimulation with an AP orientation over the latency of motor-evoked potentials evoked by direct activation of corticospinal axons using LM stimulation] and changes in cortical excitability following iTBS, confirming previous studies. AP-LM latency significantly decreased following iTBS, and this decrease correlated with the iTBS-induced increase in cortical excitability across subjects. Plasticity in the motor network may in part derive from a modulation of excitability and the recruitment of late I-wave generating cortical pathways.

ABSTRACT

Plasticity-induction following theta burst transcranial stimulation (TBS) varies considerably across subjects, and the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms remain poorly understood, representing a challenge for scientific and clinical applications. In human motor cortex (M1), recruitment of indirect waves (I-waves) can be probed by the excess latency of motor-evoked potentials elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation with an anterior-posterior (AP) orientation over the latency of motor-evoked potentials evoked by direct activation of corticospinal axons using lateromedial (LM) stimulation, referred to as the 'AP-LM latency' difference. Importantly, AP-LM latency has been shown to predict individual responses to TBS across subjects. We, therefore, hypothesized that the plastic changes in corticospinal excitability induced by TBS are the result, at least in part, of changes in excitability of these same I-wave generating pathways. In 20 healthy subjects, we investigated whether intermittent TBS (iTBS) modulates I-wave recruitment as reflected by changes in the AP-LM latency. As expected, we found that AP-LM latencies before iTBS were associated with iTBS-induced excitability changes. A novel finding was that iTBS reduced AP-LM latency, and that this reduction significantly correlated with changes in cortical excitability observed following iTBS: subjects with larger reductions in AP-LM latencies featured larger increases in cortical excitability following iTBS. Our findings suggest that plasticity-induction by iTBS may derive from the modulation of I-wave generating pathways projecting onto M1, accounting for the predictive potential of I-wave recruitment. The excitability of I-wave generating pathways may serve a critical role in modulating motor cortical excitability and hence represent a promising target for novel repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols.

Brain oscillation-synchronized stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depression using real-time EEG-triggered TMS

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is an effective treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), but response rates are low and effect sizes small. Synchronizing TMS pulses with instantaneous brain oscillations can reduce variability and increase efficacy of TMS-induced plasticity.

OBJECTIVE

To study whether brain oscillation-synchronized rTMS is feasible, safe and has neuromodulatory effects when targeting the DLPFC of patients with MDD.

METHODS

Using real-time EEG-triggered TMS we conducted a pseudo-randomized controlled single-session crossover trial of brain oscillation-synchronized rTMS of left DLPFC in 17 adult patients with antidepressant-resistant MDD. Stimulation conditions in separate sessions were: (1) rTMS triggered at the negative EEG peak of instantaneous alpha oscillations (alpha-synchronized rTMS), (2) a variation of intermittent theta-burst stimulation (modified iTBS), and (3) a random alpha phase control condition.

RESULTS

Triggering TMS at the negative peak of instantaneous alpha oscillations by real-time analysis of the electrode F5 EEG signal was successful in 15 subjects. Two subjects reported mild transient discomfort at the site of stimulation during stimulation; no serious adverse events were reported. Alpha-synchronized rTMS, but not modified iTBS or the random alpha phase control condition, reduced resting-state alpha activity in left DLPFC and increased TMS-induced beta oscillations over frontocentral channels.

CONCLUSIONS

Alpha-synchronized rTMS of left DLPFC is feasible, safe and has specific single-session neuromodulatory effects in patients with antidepressant-resistant MDD. Future studies need to further elucidate the mechanisms, optimize the parameters and investigate the therapeutic potential and efficacy of brain oscillation-synchronized rTMS in MDD.

Transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation (tES and TMS) for addiction medicine: A consensus paper on the present state of the science and the road ahead

There is growing interest in non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) as a novel treatment option for substance-use disorders (SUDs). Recent momentum stems from a foundation of preclinical neuroscience demonstrating links between neural circuits and drug consuming behavior, as well as recent FDA-approval of NIBS treatments for mental health disorders that share overlapping pathology with SUDs. As with any emerging field, enthusiasm must be tempered by reason; lessons learned from the past should be prudently applied to future therapies. Here, an international ensemble of experts provides an overview of the state of transcranial-electrical (tES) and transcranial-magnetic (TMS) stimulation applied in SUDs. This consensus paper provides a systematic literature review on published data - emphasizing the heterogeneity of methods and outcome measures while suggesting strategies to help bridge knowledge gaps. The goal of this effort is to provide the community with guidelines for best practices in tES/TMS SUD research. We hope this will accelerate the speed at which the community translates basic neuroscience into advanced neuromodulation tools for clinical practice in addiction medicine.

The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation as a treatment for movement disorders: A critical review

BACKGROUND

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a safe and painless non-invasive brain stimulation technique that has been largely used in the past 30 years to explore cortical function in healthy participants and, inter alia, the pathophysiology of movement disorders. During the years, its use has evolved from primarily research purposes to treatment of a large variety of neurological and psychiatric diseases. In this article, we illustrate the basic principles on which the therapeutic use of transcranial magnetic stimulation is based and review the clinical trials that have been performed in patients with movement disorders.

METHODS

A search of the PubMed database for research and review articles was performed on therapeutic applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation in movement disorders. The search included the following conditions: Parkinson's disease, dystonia, Tourette syndrome and other chronic tic disorders, Huntington's disease and choreas, and essential tremor. The results of the studies and possible mechanistic explanations for the relatively minor effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation are discussed. Possible ways to improve the methodology and achieve greater therapeutic efficacy are discussed.

CONCLUSION

Despite the promising and robust rationales for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulations as a treatment tool in movement disorders, the results taken as a whole are not as successful as were initially expected. There is encouraging evidence that transcranial magnetic stimulation may improve motor symptoms and depression in Parkinson's disease, but the efficacy in other movement disorders is unclear. Possible improvements in methodology are on the horizon but have yet to be implemented in large clinical studies. © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Alternate day dTMS combined with SSRIs for chronic treatment resistant depression: A prospective multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Chronic treatment resistant depression takes a substantial toll on patients' quality of life and alternative treatment options are limited. This prospective multicenter study evaluated the safety, tolerability and efficacy of four weeks of thrice-a-week deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) in combination with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

METHODS

Forty patients who failed to respond during a 16-week double-blind placebo controlled (DBPC) trial of dTMS or sham dTMS as monotherapy were screened and started a treatment of previously tolerable but ineffective SSRI. After ten days of medication, high frequency dTMS was added three times a week for four weeks.

RESULTS

dTMS combined with SSRIs was well tolerated, with only headaches as a related adverse event (n = 4), which did not cause drop outs. Six patients were excluded from analysis: 1 was missing screening data and 5 received less than 10 sessions. Out of 34 patients included in this study, 12 (35.3%) patients remitted (HDRS-21 < 10). No significant differences were found between patients who had received sham or active dTMS in the earlier DBPC multicenter trial.

LIMITATIONS

This was a small scale open study of dTMS with SSRIs in patients that failed to respond during a DBPC dTMS trial, although a carryover effect cannot be excluded. Comparative efficacy of dTMS with and without SSRIs and specific dosing and protocol parameters warrant specifically-designed large-scale controlled studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Thrice weekly dTMS at 120% motor threshold(MT), 10 HZ, 3‑s trains, 20‑s intervals, 2400 daily pulses, can augment formerly ineffective SSRI treatment.

Remission rate of transcranial magnetic stimulation compared with electroconvulsive therapy: a case-control study

PURPOSE

To compare the rate of remission, rate of response, change in depressive symptoms, and adverse effects between repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective case-control study, 35 patients treated for depression with rTMS (left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, 90% observed motor threshold, 10 Hz, 2000 pulses/session, 15 sessions) at Örebro University Hospital, Sweden (cases), were compared with a matched group of 35 patients treated for depression with ECT (controls). Data on controls were obtained from the Swedish National Quality Register for ECT (Q-ECT). Severity of depression was evaluated using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression rating scale (MADRS).

RESULTS

Remission rate was 26% for cases and 43% for controls (p = .3). Response rate was 40% for cases and 51% for controls (p = .63). The median decrease in MADRS was 11 (IQR 3-19) vs. 17 (IQR 6-27; p = .10) for rTMS and ECT, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in any measure of treatment effect between rTMS and ECT. More than half of the patients of the rTMS group experienced scalp discomfort and 11% of the ECT group had memory disturbances.

CONCLUSIONS

All measures of therapeutic efficacy were numerically inferior in the rTMS group compared to the ECT group. The differences were not statistically significant, probably because the sample size was small. More studies are required to find the optimal place for rTMS within the Swedish health care system. Such studies could be facilitated by inclusion of rTMS in the Q-ECT.

Less Might Be More: Conduction Failure as a Factor Possibly Limiting the Efficacy of Higher Frequencies in rTMS Protocols

Introduction: rTMS has been proven effective in the treatment of neuropsychiatric conditions, with class A (definite efficacy) evidence for treatment of depression and pain (Lefaucheur et al., 2014). The efficacy in stimulation protocols is, however, quite heterogeneous. Saturation of neuronal firing by HFrTMS without allowing time for recovery may lead to neuronal response failures (NRFs) that compromise the efficacy of stimulation with higher frequencies.

Objectives: To examine the efficacy of different rTMS temporal stimulation patterns focusing on a possible upper stimulation limit related to response failures. Protocol patterns were derived from published clinical studies on therapeutic rTMS for depression and pain. They were compared with conduction failures in cell cultures.

Methodology: From 57 papers using protocols rated class A for depression and pain (Lefaucheur et al., 2014) we extracted Inter-train interval (ITI), average frequency, total duration and total number of pulses and plotted them against the percent improvement on the outcome scale. Specifically, we compared 10 Hz trains with ITIs of 8 s (protocol A) and 26 s (protocol B) in vitro on cultured cortical neurons.

Results: In the in vitro experiments, protocol A with 8-s ITIs resulted in more frequent response failures, while practically no response failures occurred with protocol B (26-s intervals). The HFrTMS protocol analysis exhibited no significant effect of ITIs on protocol efficiency.

Discussion: In the neuronal culture, longer ITIs appeared to allow the neuronal response to recover. In the available human dataset on both depression and chronic pain, data concerning shorter ITIs is does not allow a significant conclusion.

Significance: NRF may interfere with the efficacy of rTMS stimulation protocols when the average stimulation frequency is too high, proposing ITIs as a variable in rTMS protocol efficacy. Clinical trials are necessary to examine effect of shorter ITIs on the clinical outcome in a controlled setting.

Consensus Recommendations for the Clinical Application of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) in the Treatment of Depression

OBJECTIVE

To provide expert recommendations for the safe and effective application of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD).

PARTICIPANTS

Participants included a group of 17 expert clinicians and researchers with expertise in the clinical application of rTMS, representing both the National Network of Depression Centers (NNDC) rTMS Task Group and the American Psychiatric Association Council on Research (APA CoR) Task Force on Novel Biomarkers and Treatments.

EVIDENCE

The consensus statement is based on a review of extensive literature from 2 databases (OvidSP MEDLINE and PsycINFO) searched from 1990 through 2016. The search terms included variants of major depressive disorder and transcranial magnetic stimulation. The results were limited to articles written in English that focused on adult populations. Of the approximately 1,500 retrieved studies, a total of 118 publications were included in the consensus statement and were supplemented with expert opinion to achieve consensus recommendations on key issues surrounding the administration of rTMS for MDD in clinical practice settings.

CONSENSUS PROCESS

In cases in which the research evidence was equivocal or unclear, a consensus decision on how rTMS should be administered was reached by the authors of this article and is denoted in the article as "expert opinion."

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple randomized controlled trials and published literature have supported the safety and efficacy of rTMS antidepressant therapy. These consensus recommendations, developed by the NNDC rTMS Task Group and APA CoR Task Force on Novel Biomarkers and Treatments, provide comprehensive information for the safe and effective clinical application of rTMS in the treatment of MDD.

Neurobiological and clinical effects of fNIRS-controlled rTMS in patients with panic disorder/agoraphobia during cognitive-behavioural therapy

BACKGROUND

A relevant proportion of patients with panic disorder (PD) does not improve even though they receive state of the art treatment for anxiety disorders such as cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). At the same time, it is known, that from a neurobiological point of view, PD patients are often characterised by prefrontal hypoactivation. Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) is a non-invasive type of neurostimulation which can modulate cortical activity and thus has the potential to normalise prefrontal hypoactivity found in PD. We therefore aimed at investigating the effects of iTBS as an innovative add-on to CBT in the treatment for PD.

METHODS

In this double-blind, bicentric study, 44 PD patients, randomised to sham or verum stimulation, received 15 sessions of iTBS over the left prefrontal cortex (PFC) in addition to 9 weeks of group CBT. Cortical activity during a cognitive as well as an emotional (Emotional Stroop) paradigm was assessed both at baseline and post-iTBS treatment using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and compared to healthy controls.

RESULTS

In this manuscript we only report the results of the emotional paradigm; for the results of the cognitive paradigm please refer to Deppermann et al. (2014). During the Emotional Stroop test, PD patients showed significantly reduced activation to panic-related compared to neutral stimuli for the left PFC at baseline. Bilateral prefrontal activation for panic-related stimuli significantly increased after verum iTBS only. Clinical ratings significantly improved during CBT and remained stable at follow-up. However, no clinical differences between the verum- and sham-stimulated group were identified, except for a more stable reduction of agoraphobic avoidance during follow-up in the verum iTBS group.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include insufficient blinding, the missing control for possible state-dependent iTBS effects, and the timing of iTBS application during CBT.

CONCLUSION

Prefrontal hypoactivity in PD patients was normalised by add-on iTBS. Clinical improvement of anxiety symptoms was not affected by iTBS.

Strategies for replacing non-invasive brain stimulation sessions: recommendations for designing neurostimulation clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Despite the potential impact of missed visits on the outcomes of neuromodulation treatments, it is not clear how this issue has been addressed in clinical trials. Given this gap in the literature, we reviewed articles on non-invasive brain stimulation in participants with depression or chronic pain, and investigated how missed visits were handled. Areas covered: We performed a search on PUBMED/MEDLINE using the keywords: 'tDCS', 'transcranial direct current stimulation', 'transcranial magnetic stimulation', 'depression', and 'pain'. We included studies with a minimum of five participants who were diagnosed with depression or chronic pain, who underwent a minimum of five tDCS or TMS sessions. A total of 181 studies matched our inclusion criteria, 112 on depression and 69 on chronic pain. Of these, only fifteen (8%) articles reported or had a protocol addressing missed visits. This review demonstrates that, in most of the trials, there is no reported plan to handle missed visits. Expert commentary: Based on our findings and previous studies, we developed suggestions on how to handle missed visits in neuromodulation protocols. A maximum of 20% of missing sessions should be allowed before excluding a patient and these sessions should be replaced at the end of the stimulation period.

Efficacy of theta burst stimulation (TBS) for major depression: An exploratory meta-analysis of randomized and sham-controlled trials

Theta burst stimulation (TBS) has been proposed as a novel treatment for major depression (MD). However, randomized and sham-controlled trials (RCTs) published to date have yielded heterogeneous clinical results and we have thus carried out the present systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate this issue. We searched the literature for RCTs on TBS for MD from January 2001 through September 2016 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL. We then performed a random-effects meta-analysis with the main outcome measures including pre-post score changes in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) as well as rates of response, remission and dropout. Data were obtained from 5 RCTs, totalling 221 subjects with MD. The pooled Hedges' g for pre-post change in HAM-D scores was 1.0 (p = 0.003), indicating a significant and large-sized difference in outcome favouring active TBS. Furthermore, active TBS was associated with significantly higher response rates when compared to sham TBS (35.6% vs. 17.5%, respectively; p = 0.005), although the groups did not differ in terms of rates of remission (18.6% vs. 10.7%, respectively; p = 0.1) and dropout (4.2% vs. 7.8%, respectively; p = 0.5). Finally, subgroup analyses indicated that bilateral TBS and unilateral intermittent TBS seem to be the most promising protocols. In conclusion, although TBS is a promising novel therapeutic intervention for MD, future studies should identify more clinically-relevant stimulation parameters as well as neurobiological predictors of treatment outcome, and include larger sample sizes, active comparators and longer follow-up periods.

Interindividual differences in motor network connectivity and behavioral response to iTBS in stroke patients

Cerebral plasticity-inducing approaches like repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) are of high interest in situations where reorganization of neural networks can be observed, e.g., after stroke. However, an increasing number of studies suggest that improvements in motor performance of the stroke-affected hand following modulation of primary motor cortex (M1) excitability by rTMS shows a high interindividual variability. We here tested the hypothesis that in stroke patients the interindividual variability of behavioral response to excitatory rTMS is related to interindividual differences in network connectivity of the stimulated region. Chronic stroke patients (n = 14) and healthy controls (n = 12) were scanned with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) while performing a simple hand motor task. Dynamic causal modeling (DCM) was used to investigate effective connectivity of key motor regions. On two different days after the fMRI experiment, patients received either intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) over ipsilesional M1 or control stimulation over the parieto-occipital cortex. Motor performance and TMS parameters of cortical excitability were measured before and after iTBS. Our results revealed that patients with better motor performance of the affected hand showed stronger endogenous coupling between supplemental motor area (SMA) and M1 before starting the iTBS intervention. Applying iTBS to ipsilesional M1 significantly increased ipsilesional M1 excitability and decreased contralesional M1 excitability as compared to control stimulation. Individual behavioral improvements following iTBS specifically correlated with neural coupling strengths in the stimulated hemisphere prior to stimulation, especially for connections targeting the stimulated M1. Combining endogenous connectivity and behavioral parameters explained 82% of the variance in hand motor performance observed after iTBS. In conclusion, the data suggest that the individual susceptibility to iTBS after stroke is influenced by interindividual differences in motor network connectivity of the lesioned hemisphere.

High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the left DLPFC for major depression: Session-dependent efficacy: A meta-analysis

Background

Depression is a major debilitating psychiatric disorder. Current antidepressant drugs are often associated with side effects or treatment resistance. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate therapeutic effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) in major depression (MD).

Methods

The medical data bases of PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the therapeutic effects of high-frequency rTMS for depression, which were published in English between January 1990 and June 2016. The index terms were “depress*”, “depression” and “transcranial magnetic stimulation”. Depression outcome data of different sessions (5, 10, 15, and 20 sessions of rTMS treatment) were extracted and synthesized by calculating standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) by using a random-effect model. Within each session group, the subgroup analyses based on the number of pulses (≤ 1000, 1200–1500, 1600–1800, and 2000–3000) were also conducted.

Results

Thirty RCTs with a total of 1754 subjects including 1136 in the rTMS group and 618 in the sham group were included in this meta-analysis. rTMS had a significant overall therapeutic effect on depression severity scores (SMD = −0.73, P < 0.00001). The five, 10, 15, 20 sessions of rTMS treatments yielded the significant mean effect sizes of −0.43, −0.60, −1.13, and −2.74, respectively. In the four groups (5, 10, 15, 20 sessions), the maximal mean effect size was all obtained in the subgroup of 1200–1500 pulses per day (−0.97, −1.14, −1.91, −5.47; P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The increasing of HF-rTMS sessions is associated with the increased efficacy of HF-rTMS in reducing depressed patients’ symptom severity. A total number of pulses of 1200–1500 per day appear to deliver the best antidepressant effects of HF-rTMS.

Neuromodulation Treatments for Geriatric Mood and Cognitive Disorders

There is increasing evidence for the efficacy of neuromodulation in the treatment of resistant mood disorders and emerging data supporting the use of neuromodulation in cognitive disorders. A significant minority of depressed elders do not respond to pharmacotherapy and/or psychotherapy. This has led clinicians to recommend the increasing use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in the treatment of medication-resistant or life-threatening geriatric depression. Multiple studies have supported the safety and efficacy of ECT in the elderly, yet ECT is associated with side effects including cardiovascular and cognitive side effects. Neuromodulation therapies have the potential for providing effective treatment for treatment-resistant older adults with reduced side effects and this review will outline the risks and benefits of neuromodulation treatment in geriatric psychiatry. There is also emerging evidence of the efficacy of neuromodulation devices in the treatment of cognitive disorders. Pharmacotherapy has been largely ineffective in changing the course of neurodegenerative diseases causing dementia and other treatments are clearly needed. This review will outline the available evidence for neuromodulation in the treatment of mood and cognitive disorders in the elderly.

Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) - beyond depression

INTRODUCTION

Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) utilizes different H-coils to study and treat a variety of psychiatric and neurological conditions with identifiable brain targets. The availability of this technology is dramatically changing the practice of psychiatry and neurology as it provides a safe and effective way to treat even drug-resistant patients. However, up until now, no effort was made to summarize the different types of H-coils that are available, and the conditions for which they were tested. Areas covered: Here we assembled all peer reviewed publication that used one of the H-coils, together with illustrations of the effective field they generate within the brain. Currently, the technology has FDA clearance for depression and European clearance for additional disorders, and multi-center trials are exploring its safety and effectiveness for OCD, PTSD, bipolar depression and nicotine addiction. Expert commentary: Taken together with positive results in smaller scale experiments, dTMS coils represent a non-invasive way to manipulate pathological activity in different brain structures and circuits. Advances in stimulation and imaging methods can now lead to efficacious and logical treatments. This should reduce the stigma associated with mental disorders, and improve access to psychiatric treatment.

Lorentz force optical coherence elastography

Quantifying tissue biomechanical properties can assist in detection of abnormalities and monitoring disease progression and/or response to a therapy. Optical coherence elastography (OCE) has emerged as a promising technique for noninvasively characterizing tissue biomechanical properties. Several mechanical loading techniques have been proposed to induce static or transient deformations in tissues, but each has its own areas of applications and limitations. This study demonstrates the combination of Lorentz force excitation and phase-sensitive OCE at ?1.5??million A-lines per second to quantify the elasticity of tissue by directly imaging Lorentz force-induced elastic waves. This method of tissue excitation opens the possibility of a wide range of investigations using tissue biocurrents and conductivity for biomechanical analysis.

The Clinical TMS Society Consensus Review and Treatment Recommendations for TMS Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder

BACKGROUND

Prefrontal Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) therapy repeated daily over 4-6 weeks (20-30 sessions) is US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for treating Major Depressive Disorder in adults who have not responded to prior antidepressant medications. In 2011, leading TMS clinical providers and researchers created the Clinical TMS Society (cTMSs) (www.clinicaltmssociety.org, Greenwich, CT, USA), incorporated in 2013.

METHODS

This consensus review was written by cTMSs leaders, informed by membership polls, and approved by the governing board. It summarizes current evidence for the safety and efficacy of the use of TMS therapy for treating depression in routine clinical practice. Authors systematically reviewed the published TMS antidepressant therapy clinical trials. Studies were then assessed and graded on their strength of evidence using the Levels of Evidence framework published by the University of Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. The authors then summarize essentials for using TMS therapy in routine clinical practice settings derived from discussions and polls of cTMSs members. Finally, each summary clinical recommendation is presented with the substantiating peer-reviewed, published evidence supporting that recommendation. When the current published clinical trial evidence was insufficient or incomplete, expert opinion was included when sufficient consensus was available from experienced clinician users among the membership of the cTMSs, who were polled at the Annual Meetings in 2014 and 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily left prefrontal TMS has substantial evidence of efficacy and safety for treating the acute phase of depression in patients who are treatment resistant or intolerant. Following the clinical recommendations in this document should result in continued safe and effective use of this exciting new treatment modality.