Efficacy of transcranial direct-current stimulation in women with provoked vestibulodynia

Abstract

Findings suggest that active transcranial direct-current stimulation is not more effective than sham transcranial direct-current stimulation for reducing pain in women with provoked vestibulodynia. Likewise, no significant effects were found on sexual function, vestibular sensitivity, or psychological distress.

Latin American and Caribbean consensus on noninvasive central nervous system neuromodulation for chronic pain management (LAC2-NIN-CP)

“…1). The final analysis was made with 49 studies, 24 of tDCS 3,4,7,8,17,24,29,33,36,41,42,54,65,66,75,78,83,90,94,105,108,110,113,116 and 22 of rTMS. 1,6,15,22,23,35,44,51–53,63,64,67,69,73,76,77,84,85,87,101,103 Countries involved in these studies are shown in supplementary file 2 (S2), available at http://links.lww.com/PR9/A35.…”

“…Some tDCS studies did report adverse events in active groups. 78,83,94,104,113 Only 2 rTMS 1,50 and one tDCS studies failed to mention adverse events. In one tDCS study, it was not possible to state whether the adverse events were in the active or sham group.…”

Is transcranial direct current stimulation beneficial for treating pain, depression, and anxiety symptoms in patients with chronic pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Studies covered a wide variety of pain types. Most trials enrolled male and female patients except (Fregni et al, 2006b ; Forogh et al, 2021 ) (fibromyalgia); (Divandari et al, 2019 ) (chronic pelvic pain); (Morin et al, 2017 ) (provoked vestibulodynia); and (Dutra et al, 2020 ; Pegado et al, 2020 ) (chronic abdominal pain), which recruited females only. One study did not present information on gender distribution (Samartin-Veiga et al, 2022 ).…”

“…Sufficient information was accessible from 16 investigations ( n = 683) for short-term assessment. We did not extract data from (Morin et al, 2017 ; Young et al, 2020 ) as the necessary chronic pain scores were not available for the short-term analysis. Figure 2A revealed an overall effect of real stimulation (SMD: −0.43, 95% CI: −0.75 to −0.12, P = 0.007), but with considerable heterogeneity ( I 2 = 76.2%, P < 0.001).…”

“…Three investigations ( n = 92) provided long-term data for pain analysis (Mendonca et al, 2016 ; Morin et al, 2017 ; Forogh et al, 2021 ). High heterogeneity was observed ( I 2 = 71.9%, P = 0.03), and no influence for real tDCS was presented (SMD: 0.46, 95% CI: −0.35–1.27, P = 0.27; Supplementary Figure S2 ).…”