Repetitive TMS in treatment of resistant diabetic neuropathic pain

Abdel-Kader, A.; Gohary, Amira M. El; Mourad, Husam S; Salmawy, Dina A El

doi:10.1186/s41983-019-0075-x

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three of them (16.66%) (43,45,54) mentioned adverse effects classi ed as mild, among them headache, pain in the extremity, dizziness and drowsiness, being these the most noted. However, ten of the articles (55.55%) (39,40,44,(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)53) mentioned not having found severe adverse effects in their protocols.…”

Section: Adverse Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: Effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the management of oncological and non-oncological neuropathic pain. A systematic review

Muñetón

Bedoya

Bustos

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) emerges as an innovative alternative for the management of neuropathic pain, rTMS is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique which induces electrical currents in the nervous tissue of the cortex. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of rTMS in the management of oncological and non- oncological neuropathic pain. Methods: The search was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, SCOPUS and LILACS. Inclusion criteria were 1) population: Male and female between 18 and 85 years with oncologic and non-oncologic neuropathic pain; 2) intervention: Treated with Transcranial magnetic stimulation; 3) comparison: Inactive control groups, and parallel active interventions; and 4) outcome: Primary outcome was modulation of pain. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and adverse effects. Risk of bias and quality of study reporting were also assessed. Results: The search found 1116 articles, with 18 articles meeting the PICO criteria. 9 ECAS and 9 observational studies. The total sample was 707 patients, the number of sessions ranges from a single session to 15 sessions, with an average of 3.5 sessions. Follow-up was variable. The Follow-up vary from 7 to 311.8 days, with an average of 45 days. Pain reduction was obtained in the 18 studies. Conclusion: rTMS may be and effective therapeutic option to treat neuropathic pain. We found moderate quality of evidence for pain modulation; for quality of life the results are uncertain to determine changes, due to very low evidence. Additional research effort is needed to reduce bias and improve quality.

show abstract

Section: Adverse Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: Effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the management of oncological and non-oncological neuropathic pain. A systematic review

Muñetón

Bedoya

Bustos

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3,4 Studies assessing the effect of TCMS on pain associated with DPN have used low intensity stimulation with conflicting results. 5,6 Thus far, no studies have examined peripherally delivered high intensity (1.2 Telsa) TCMS in painful DPN.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Transcutaneous Magnetic Stimulation to Treat Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Rao

Satyarengga

Lamos

et al. 2021

J Diabetes Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The risk of bias for individual two QE study 43,44 was assessed using the Methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) tool. The overall MINORS score of these two studies was 19 for Abdelkader 2019 43 (low-risk) and 12 for Armstrong 1997 44 (high-risk). In Abdelkader et al study, the baseline characteristics between groups were not balanced.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Assessment the Risk Of Bias For Individual 18 mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We included two QE studies, we decided to keep separate from the RCT analyses to reduce the bias of our pooled estimates. These two studies 43,44 reported non-combinable data, thus we could not perform a meta-analysis. One study (n = 20) used a central technique (highfrequency rTMS over motor cortex) 43 , the authors reported a pain reduction after intervention of 4.0 to 5.10 VAS points and a significant increase on MCV.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Assessment the Risk Of Bias For Individual 18 mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These two studies 43,44 reported non-combinable data, thus we could not perform a meta-analysis. One study (n = 20) used a central technique (highfrequency rTMS over motor cortex) 43 , the authors reported a pain reduction after intervention of 4.0 to 5.10 VAS points and a significant increase on MCV. The second study (n = 10) used an electrical peripheral intervention (PENS) 44 and reported a 5.5 VAS points reduction after intervention, no data on NCV was available.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Assessment the Risk Of Bias For Individual 18 mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Non-invasive neuromodulation effects on painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zeng¹,

Pacheco‐Barrios²,

Cao³

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (DPN) typically is accompanied by painful symptoms. Several therapeutic agents have been tried for symptomatic relief, but with varying results. The use of non-invasive neuromodulation (NINM) is a potential treatment option for DPN. The objective of our study is to evaluate NINM effects on pain rating and nerve conduction velocity in DPN patients. The search was carried out in seven databases until Aug 30th, 2019. Finally, twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. We found a significant reduction of pain scores by central NINMs (effect size [ES] = − 0.75, 95% CI = − 1.35 to − 0.14), but not by the overall peripheral techniques (electrical and electromagnetic) (ES = − 0.58, 95% CI = − 1.23 to 0.07). However, the subgroup of peripheral electrical NINMs reported a significant higher effect (ES = − 0.84, 95% CI = − 1.57 to − 0.11) compared to electromagnetic techniques (ES = 0.21; 95% CI = − 1.00 to 1.42, I2 = 95.3%) . Other subgroup analysis results show that NINMs effects are higher with intensive protocols and in populations with resistant symptoms or intolerance to analgesic medications. Besides, NINMs can increase motor nerves velocity (ES = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.47 to 2.17), and there were no effects on sensory nerves velocity (ES = 0.01, 95% CI = − 0.79 to 0.80). The results suggest that central and peripheral electrical NINMs could reduce neuropathic pain among DPN patients, without reported adverse events. Well-powered studies are needed to confirm that NINM techniques as an alternative effective and safe treatment option.

show abstract

Repetitive TMS in treatment of resistant diabetic neuropathic pain

Cited by 9 publications

References 36 publications

WITHDRAWN: Effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the management of oncological and non-oncological neuropathic pain. A systematic review

WITHDRAWN: Effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the management of oncological and non-oncological neuropathic pain. A systematic review

The Use of Transcutaneous Magnetic Stimulation to Treat Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Non-invasive neuromodulation effects on painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About