Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Adolescents and Young Adults

Weaver, Laurel; Rostain, Anthony L.; Mace, William M.; Akhtar, Umair; Moss, Edward; O’Reardon, John P.

doi:10.1097/yct.0b013e31824532c8

Cited by 80 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…rTMS was the most frequently examined NIBS modality, with 35 publications addressing the application of TMS on children and adolescents (3.0 to 17.8 years old) [38–40, 44–46, 52, 55–57, 64–67, 70, 71, 73, 75–81, 83, 85–94]. The duration of the interventions ranged from one day to 18 weeks, and the stimulation provided was administered in frequencies ranging from 0.3Hz to 10Hz; two studies reported priming the subject with a frequency of 6Hz before the procedure [46, 52].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation in Children and Adolescents

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial current stimulation (tCS) have the potential to mitigate a variety of symptoms associated with neurological and psychiatric conditions, including stroke, cerebral palsy, autism, depression, and Tourette syndrome. While the safety of these modalities has been established in adults, there is a paucity of research assessing the safety of NIBS among children. Objective To examine the existing literature regarding the safety of NIBS techniques in children and adolescents with neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders. Methods An electronic search was performed on online databases for studies using NIBS in individuals less than 18 years of age. Non-English publications, diagnostic studies, electroconvulsive therapy, single/dual pulse TMS studies, and reviews were excluded. Adverse events reported in the studies were carefully examined and synthesized to understand the safety and tolerability of NIBS among children and adolescents. Results The data from 48 studies involving more than 513 children/adolescents (2.5–17.8 years of age) indicate that the side-effects of NIBS were, in general, mild and transient [TMS: headache (11.5%), scalp discomfort (2.5%), twitching (1.2%), mood changes (1.2%), fatigue (0.9%), tinnitus (0.6%); tCS: tingling (11.5%), itching (5.8%), redness (4.7%), scalp discomfort (3.1%)] with relatively few serious adverse events. Conclusion Our findings indicate that both repetitive TMS and tCS are safe modalities in children and adolescents with various neurological conditions, especially when safety guidelines are followed. The incidence of adverse events appears to be similar to that observed in adults; however, further studies with longer treatment and follow-up periods are needed to better understand the benefits and tolerance of long-term use of NIBS in children.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation in Children and Adolescents

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…TMS is continuously establishing itself as one of the “tools of the trade” in psychiatric therapeutic practice (Kammer and Spitzer, 2012) improving mental functions in: Parkinson's disease (Pascual-Leone et al, 1994), aphasia (Medina et al, 2012), motor control after stroke (Takeuchi et al, 2005), epilepsy (Nitsche and Paulus, 2009), depression (Lisanby et al, 2009; Conforto et al, 2014), schizophrenia (Levkovitz et al, 2011; Kammer and Spitzer, 2012), autism (Krause et al, 2012), chronic migraine (Conforto et al, 2014), dyslexia (Costanzo et al, 2013), neglect (Fasotti and Van Kessel, 2013), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) (Mantovani et al, 2013), chronic pain (Moreno-Duarte et al, 2014), and social anxiety disorder (Paes et al, 2013). The TMS therapy applied to younger patients (children and adolescents) improves cognitive functions (Vicario and Nitsche, 2013) in: stroke affecting the motor cortex (Kirton et al, 2008), epilepsy (Fregni et al, 2005), ADHD (Weaver et al, 2012), Tourette syndrome (Le et al, 2013), autism (Baruth et al, 2010), treatment-resistant depression (Bloch et al, 2008), and medication-resistant schizophrenia (Jardri et al, 2012). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A practical application of text mining to literature on cognitive rehabilitation and enhancement through neurostimulation

Balan

Gerits

Vanduffel

2014

Front. Syst. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The exponential growth in publications represents a major challenge for researchers. Many scientific domains, including neuroscience, are not yet fully engaged in exploiting large bodies of publications. In this paper, we promote the idea to partially automate the processing of scientific documents, specifically using text mining (TM), to efficiently review big corpora of publications. The “cognitive advantage” given by TM is mainly related to the automatic extraction of relevant trends from corpora of literature, otherwise impossible to analyze in short periods of time. Specifically, the benefits of TM are increased speed, quality and reproducibility of text processing, boosted by rapid updates of the results. First, we selected a set of TM-tools that allow user-friendly approaches of the scientific literature, and which could serve as a guide for researchers willing to incorporate TM in their work. Second, we used these TM-tools to obtain basic insights into the relevant literature on cognitive rehabilitation (CR) and cognitive enhancement (CE) using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). TM readily extracted the diversity of TMS applications in CR and CE from vast corpora of publications, automatically retrieving trends already described in published reviews. TMS emerged as one of the important non-invasive tools that can both improve cognitive and motor functions in numerous neurological diseases and induce modulations/enhancements of many fundamental brain functions. TM also revealed trends in big corpora of publications by extracting occurrence frequency and relationships of particular subtopics. Moreover, we showed that CR and CE share research topics, both aiming to increase the brain's capacity to process information, thus supporting their integration in a larger perspective. Methodologically, despite limitations of a simple user-friendly approach, TM served well the reviewing process.

show abstract

“…One pilot single-session, sham-controlled trial found that high-frequency rTMS over the right DLPFC improved attention difficulties in ADHD patients (Bloch et al, 2010), although another study applying 10 consecutive sessions of high-frequency rTMS over the right DLPFC did not show significant differences in attention compared to sham rTMS (Weaver et al, 2012). It should be emphasized that not only the DLPFC but also other brain areas, such as the anterior cingulate cortex and the basal ganglia, are involved (Frodl & Skokauskas, 2012); nevertheless, for non-invasive brain stimulation purposes the DLPFC might be the most accessible gateway to modulate the cortico-subcortical pathways involved in ADHD.…”

Section: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 98%