ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of different stimulation modalities of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with SSRI in improving depressed mood after stroke using network meta-analysis. MethodsThe PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the objectives from inception to October 1, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed by using R 4.2.1software. ResultsA total of 25 RCTs involving 2 152 patients were included. Four types of rTMS stimulation combined with SSRIs were included: high-frequency stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal (l-DLPFC), low-frequency stimulation of l-DLPFC, low-frequency stimulation of the right dorsolateral prefrontal (r-DLPFC), and low-frequency stimulation of the bilateral DLPFC. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the effect of combining four stimulation methods with SSRI in treating depression was better than that of SSRI alone (P<0.05). Probability sorting results showed that low-frequency stimulated bilateral DLPFC (88.9%) > low-frequency stimulated l-DLPFC (63.1%) > high-frequency stimulation l-DLPFC (57.1%) > low-frequency stimulation r-DLPFC (40.4%). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the four stimulation methods combined with SSRI and the use of SSRI alone (P>0.05). Conclusion rTMS combined with SSRIs is better than SSRIs alone in improving depressed mood after stroke. Low-frequency rTMS stimulation of bilateral DLPFC may be the best. Meanwhile, the safety of different stimulation methods is good.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) combined with electroencephalography(EEG) has become an important tool in brain research. However, it is difficult to remove the large artifacts in EEG signals caused by the online TMS intervention. In this paper, we summed up various types of artifacts. After introducing a variety of online methods, the paper emphasized on offline approaches, such as subtraction, principal component analysis and independent component analysis, which can remove or minimize TMS-induced artifacts according to their different characteristics. Although these approaches can deal with most of the artifacts induced by TMS, the removal of large artifacts still needs to be improved. This paper systematically summarizes the effective methods for artifacts removal in TMS-EEG studies. It is a good reference for TMS-EEG researchers while choosing the suitable artifacts removal methods.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) as a non-invasive neuroregulatory technique has been applied in the clinical treatment of neurological and psychiatric diseases. However, the stimulation effects and neural regulatory mechanisms of TMS with different frequencies and modes are not yet clear. This article explores the effects of different frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and burst transcranial magnetic stimulation (bTMS) on memory function and neuronal excitability in mice from the perspective of neuroelectrophysiology. In this experiment, 42 Kunming mice aged 8 weeks were randomly divided into pseudo stimulation group and stimulation groups. The stimulation group included rTMS stimulation groups with different frequencies (1, 5, 10 Hz), and bTMS stimulation groups with different frequencies (1, 5, 10 Hz). Among them, the stimulation group received continuous stimulation for 14 days. After the stimulation, the mice underwent new object recognition and platform jumping experiment to test their memory ability. Subsequently, brain slice patch clamp experiment was conducted to analyze the excitability of granulosa cells in the dentate gyrus (DG) of mice. The results showed that compared with the pseudo stimulation group, high-frequency (5, 10 Hz) rTMS and bTMS could improve the memory ability and neuronal excitability of mice, while low-frequency (1 Hz) rTMS and bTMS have no significant effect. For the two stimulation modes at the same frequency, their effects on memory function and neuronal excitability of mice have no significant difference. The results of this study suggest that high-frequency TMS can improve memory function in mice by increasing the excitability of hippocampal DG granule neurons. This article provides experimental and theoretical basis for the mechanism research and clinical application of TMS in improving cognitive function.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on rehabilitation of unilateral neglect in stroke patients.MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, PEDro, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were searched online for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rTMS on rehabilitation of unilateral neglect in stroke patients from inception to March 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 12 RCTs involving 303 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the stimulate group was superior to the control group in line bisection test (MD=–5.54, 95%CI –6.79 to –4.29, P<0.000 01), line cancellation test (MD=–3.75, 95%CI –4.60 to –2.90,P<0.000 1) and star cancellation test (MD=–22.94, 95%CI –26.52 to –19.35,P<0.000 01). However, there was no significant difference in the score of the modified Barthel index between two groups (MD=3.91, 95%CI–9.52 to 17.34,P=0.57).ConclusionsrTMS appears to improve the symptoms of unilateral neglect in stroke patients. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusions.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the effect of repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in treating epilepsy.MethodsThe randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rTMS for epilepsy and related diseases were collected from PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases by computer. The retrieval time was from establishment to June 2019. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data and evaluated the deviation risks of the included studies. RevMan5.3 software was used for Meta analysis.ResultsA total of 21 RCTs were included, including 1 587 patients. The results showed that rTMS assisted antiepileptics drugs (AEDs) could improve the effective rate of epilepsy treatment [RR=1.28, 95% CI (1.19, 1.37)], significantly reduced HAMA, HAMD and NFDS scores in the treatment of patients with epilepsy combined with anxiety and depression [MD=−3.94, 95% CI (−4.25, −3.63)], and improve DQ and GMFM-88 scores in children with cerebral palsy combined with epilepsy [MD=7.95, 95% CI (7.00, 8.90)]. In addition, using rTMS will not cause additional adverse reaction [peto OR=0.52, 95% CI (0.31, 0.84)].ConclusionsThe current evidence showed that rTMS combined AEDs can improve the efficient of AEDs therapy. When treat anxiety depression comorbidity, it can significantly reduce the anxiety depression score. In addition in children with cerebral palsy merger, it can improve muscle strength and development. And rTMS will not cause additional adverse reactions. Limited by the quantity and quality of the selected studies, the conclusions need to be verified by more high-quality studies.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) compared with sham therapy for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Methods The Cochrane Library, Medline, EMbase, CBMdisk, CNKI and VIP were searched through computer from 1985 to 2011. The review included RCTs comparing the treatment efficacy of low-frequency rTMS located on right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) with sham stimulation in the patients suffering major depressive disorder. The quality of the included RCTs was strictly evaluated and the data were extracted by two reviewers independently. The extracted data were analyzed by RevMan 4.2. Results Among seven double-blinded RCTs involving 234 patients included, 1 was A level in quality, 5 were B level, and 1 was C level according to the outcomes of quality evaluation. The results of Meta-analysis indicated that low frequency rTMS was superior to sham stimulation in remission rates after two weeks’ treatment (RR=3.11, 95%CI 1.56 to 6.19). Additionally, low frequency rTMS was lower than the sham stimulation in the scores of HDRS and MADRS (WMD= –6.41, 95%CI –9.32 to –3.50, and WMD= –5.27, 95%CI –9.08 to –1.46, respectively). But no significant difference in response rates between the low prequency rTMS group and the sham group was found (RR=1.72, 95%CI 0.74 to 4.01). There were no severe and intolerable side effects reported in these seven studies. Conclusion The low frequency rTMS as a non-invasive and safe technique may appear to be effective for the treatment of major depressive disorder according to the positive results but the conclusion is not definite because of negative results. This review suggests that parameters could be sited as frequency: 1 Hz, intensity: 90%-110% motor threshold (MT), location: right DLPFC and duration: 2 weeks. Nevertheless, further multicenter and high quality studies are needed before it is used as a first-line treatment for major depressive disorder.
In transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), the conductivity of brain tissue is obtained by using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) data processing. However, the specific impact of different processing methods on the induced electric field in the tissue has not been thoroughly studied. In this paper, we first used magnetic resonance image (MRI) data to create a three-dimensional head model, and then estimated the conductivity of gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) using four conductivity models, namely scalar (SC), direct mapping (DM), volume normalization (VN) and average conductivity (MC), respectively. Isotropic empirical conductivity values were used for the conductivity of other tissues such as the scalp, skull, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and then the TMS simulations were performed when the coil was parallel and perpendicular to the gyrus of the target. When the coil was perpendicular to the gyrus where the target was located, it was easy to get the maximum electric field in the head model. The maximum electric field in the DM model was 45.66% higher than that in the SC model. The results showed that the conductivity component along the electric field direction of which conductivity model was smaller in TMS, the induced electric field in the corresponding domain corresponding to the conductivity model was larger. This study has guiding significance for TMS precise stimulation.
ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy of transcranial combined with peripheral repetitive magnetic stimulation on motor dysfunction after stroke.MethodsA total of 40 patients after stroke who were hospitalized in the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University between January and December 2019 were selected. The patients were divided into the trial group and the control group by random number table method, with 20 cases in each group. Both groups received conventional rehabilitation and medicine treatment, on that basis, the trial group received repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS), while the control group received rTMS combined with fake rPMS, both lasted for 2 weeks. Before treatment and 2, 4, 12 weeks after the initiation of treatment, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) [including FMA-Upper Limb (FMA-UL), FMA-Lower Limb (FMA-LL)], National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and Modified Barthel Index (MBI) were used to evaluate the efficacy of rTMS combined with rPMS.ResultsFive patients fell off, and 35 patients were finally included, including 18 in the trial group and 17 in the control group. No adverse reaction occurred during the study. Before treatment, there was no significant difference in FMA, FMA-UL, FMA-LL, NIHSS or MBI scores between the two groups (P>0.05). After treatment, the FMA score of the trial group changed from 36.44±28.59 to 75.56±19.94, and that of the control group changed from 39.05±29.85 to 54.64±23.25; the between-group difference was statistically significant at the end of the 4th and 12th weeks (P<0.05). The FMA-UL score of the trial group changed from 21.39±22.14 to 46.94±15.84, and that of the control group changed from 20.82±20.47 to 31.29±16.98; the between-group difference was statistically significant at the end of the 4th and 12th weeks (P<0.05). The FMA-LL score of the trial group changed from 15.06±9.10 to 28.61±5.69, and that of the control group changed from 18.23±10.33 to 23.35±8.20; the between-group difference was statistically significant at the end of the 12th week (P>0.05). The NIHSS score of the trial group changed from 6.83±4.54 to 2.78±2.05, and that of the control group changed from 6.35±3.67 to 3.94±2.56; the MBI score of the trial group changed from 53.33±17.90 to 83.06±12.50, and that of the control group changed from 60.88±25.45 to 78.82±15.67; there was no statistically significant difference in NIHSS or MBI between the two groups at any timepoint (P>0.05). Except for the FMA-LL of the control group, the other outcome indicators in each group were significantly different after treatment compared with those before treatment (P<0.05).ConclusionsBoth rTMS and rTMS combined with rPMS can improve the limb motor function and activities of daily living of stroke patients. The treatment mode of rTMS combined with rPMS has better effect on motor dysfunction after stroke, which is of great significance for improving the overall rehabilitation effect.