126
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)

      , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
      Clinical Neurophysiology
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A group of European experts was commissioned to establish guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) from evidence published up until March 2014, regarding pain, movement disorders, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, tinnitus, depression, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, craving/addiction, and conversion. Despite unavoidable inhomogeneities, there is a sufficient body of evidence to accept with level A (definite efficacy) the analgesic effect of high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the pain and the antidepressant effect of HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). A Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for the antidepressant effect of low-frequency (LF) rTMS of the right DLPFC, HF-rTMS of the left DLPFC for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, and LF-rTMS of contralesional M1 in chronic motor stroke. The effects of rTMS in a number of indications reach level C (possible efficacy), including LF-rTMS of the left temporoparietal cortex in tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. It remains to determine how to optimize rTMS protocols and techniques to give them relevance in routine clinical practice. In addition, professionals carrying out rTMS protocols should undergo rigorous training to ensure the quality of the technical realization, guarantee the proper care of patients, and maximize the chances of success. Under these conditions, the therapeutic use of rTMS should be able to develop in the coming years. Copyright © 2014 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

          Related collections

          Most cited references758

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research.

          This article is based on a consensus conference, which took place in Certosa di Pontignano, Siena (Italy) on March 7-9, 2008, intended to update the previous safety guidelines for the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical settings. Over the past decade the scientific and medical community has had the opportunity to evaluate the safety record of research studies and clinical applications of TMS and repetitive TMS (rTMS). In these years the number of applications of conventional TMS has grown impressively, new paradigms of stimulation have been developed (e.g., patterned repetitive TMS) and technical advances have led to new device designs and to the real-time integration of TMS with electroencephalography (EEG), positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Thousands of healthy subjects and patients with various neurological and psychiatric diseases have undergone TMS allowing a better assessment of relative risks. The occurrence of seizures (i.e., the most serious TMS-related acute adverse effect) has been extremely rare, with most of the few new cases receiving rTMS exceeding previous guidelines, often in patients under treatment with drugs which potentially lower the seizure threshold. The present updated guidelines review issues of risk and safety of conventional TMS protocols, address the undesired effects and risks of emerging TMS interventions, the applications of TMS in patients with implanted electrodes in the central nervous system, and safety aspects of TMS in neuroimaging environments. We cover recommended limits of stimulation parameters and other important precautions, monitoring of subjects, expertise of the rTMS team, and ethical issues. While all the recommendations here are expert based, they utilize published data to the extent possible.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex.

            It has been 30 years since the discovery that repeated electrical stimulation of neural pathways can lead to long-term potentiation in hippocampal slices. With its relevance to processes such as learning and memory, the technique has produced a vast literature on mechanisms of synaptic plasticity in animal models. To date, the most promising method for transferring these methods to humans is repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a noninvasive method of stimulating neural pathways in the brain of conscious subjects through the intact scalp. However, effects on synaptic plasticity reported are often weak, highly variable between individuals, and rarely last longer than 30 min. Here we describe a very rapid method of conditioning the human motor cortex using rTMS that produces a controllable, consistent, long-lasting, and powerful effect on motor cortex physiology and behavior after an application period of only 20-190 s.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              NON-INVASIVE MAGNETIC STIMULATION OF HUMAN MOTOR CORTEX

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clinical Neurophysiology
                Clinical Neurophysiology
                Elsevier BV
                13882457
                November 2014
                November 2014
                : 125
                : 11
                : 2150-2206
                Article
                10.1016/j.clinph.2014.05.021
                25034472
                578bfc4f-23ea-4c1e-819c-30522402ea17
                © 2014

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article