-
Heliyon Jun 2024Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a behaviorally defined complex neurodevelopmental syndrome characterized by persistent social communication and interaction deficit.... (Review)
Review
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a behaviorally defined complex neurodevelopmental syndrome characterized by persistent social communication and interaction deficit. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a promising and emerging tool for the intervention of ASD by reducing both core and associate symptoms. Several reviews have been published regarding TMS-based ASD treatment, however, a systematic review on study characteristics, specific stimulating parameters, localization techniques, stimulated targets, behavioral outcomes, and neuroimage biomarker changes is lagged behind since 2018. Here, we performed a systematic search on literatures published after 2018 in PubMed, Web of Science, and Science Direct. After screening, the final systematic review included 17 articles, composing seven randomized controlled trial studies and ten open-label studies. Two studies are double-blind, while the other studies have a moderate to high risk of bias attributing to inadequate subject- and evaluator-blinding to treatment allocation. Five studies utilize theta-burst stimulation mode, and the others apply repetitive TMS with low frequency (five studies), high frequency (six studies), and combined low and high frequency stimulation (one study). Most researchers prioritize the bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal lobe as stimulation target, while parietal lobule, inferior parietal lobule, and posterior superior temporal sulci have also emerged as new targets of attention. One third of the studies use neuronavigation based on anatomical magnetic resonance imaging to locate the stimulation target. After TMS intervention, discernible enhancements across a spectrum of scales are evident in stereotyped behavior, repetitive behavior, and verbal social domains. A comprehensive review of literature spanning the last five years demonstrates the potential of TMS treatment for ASD in ameliorating the clinical core symptoms.
PubMed: 38933955
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32251 -
The International Journal of... Jun 2024Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used with increasing frequency as a therapeutic tool to alleviate clinical symptoms of obsessive... (Review)
Review
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used with increasing frequency as a therapeutic tool to alleviate clinical symptoms of obsessive compulsive-disorder (OCD). However, little is known about the effects of tDCS on neurocognitive functioning among OCD patients. The aim of this review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature examining the effects of tDCS on specific neurocognitive functions in OCD. A literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted on the following databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science. The search yielded 4 results: one randomized, sham-controlled study (20 patients), one randomized, controlled, partial crossover trial (12 patients), one open-label study (5 patients), and one randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, parallel-group trial (37 patients). A total of 51 patients received active tDCS with some diversity in electrode montages targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the pre-supplementary motor area, or the orbitofrontal cortex. tDCS was associated with improved decision-making in study 1, enhanced attentional monitoring and response inhibition in study 2, improved executive and inhibitory control in study 3, and reduced attentional bias and improved response inhibition and working memory in study 4. Limitations of this review include its small sample, the absence of a sham group in half of the studies, and the heterogeneity in tDCS parameters. These preliminary results highlight the need for future testing in randomized, sham-controlled trials to examine whether and how tDCS induces relevant cognitive benefits in OCD.
PubMed: 38913323
DOI: 10.1080/00207454.2024.2371303 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Jun 2024We conducted a meta-analysis and qualitative review on the randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
We conducted a meta-analysis and qualitative review on the randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation on fear extinction and the return of fear in non-primate animals and humans.
METHODS
The meta-analysis was conducted by searching PubMed, Web of science, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library and extracting fear response in the active and sham groups in the randomized controlled trials. The pooled effect size was quantified by Hedges' g using a three-level meta-analytic model in R.
RESULTS
We identified 18 articles on the tDCS effect and 5 articles on the TMS effect, with 466 animal subjects and 621 human subjects. Our findings show that tDCS of the prefrontal cortex significantly inhibit fear retrieval in animal models (Hedges' g = -0.50). In human studies, TMS targeting the dorsolateral/ventromedial prefrontal cortex has an inhibiting effect on the return of fear (Hedges' g = -0.24).
LIMITATIONS
The limited number of studies and the heterogeneous designs of the selected studies made cross-study and cross-species comparison difficult.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings shed light on the optimal non-invasive brain stimulation protocols for targeting the neural circuitry of threat extinction in humans.
PubMed: 38908557
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.06.060 -
Expert Review of Medical Devices Jun 2024Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are increasingly used for major depressive disorder (MDD). Most... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are increasingly used for major depressive disorder (MDD). Most tDCS and rTMS studies target the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, either with or without neuronavigation. We examined the effect of rTMS and tDCS, and the added value of neuronavigation in the treatment of MDD.
METHODS
A search on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for rTMS or tDCS randomized controlled trials of MDD up to 1 February 2023, yielded 89 studies. We then performed meta-analyses comparing tDCS efficacy to non-neuronavigated rTMS, tDCS to neuronavigated rTMS, and neuronavigated rTMS to non-neuronavigated rTMS. We assessed the significance of the effect in subgroups and in the whole meta-analysis with a z-test and subgroup differences with a chi-square test.
RESULTS
We found small-to-medium effects of both tDCS and rTMS on MDD, with a slightly greater effect from rTMS. No significant difference was found between neuronavigation and non-neuronavigation.
CONCLUSION
Although both tDCS and rTMS are effective in treating MDD, many patients do not respond. Additionally, current neuronavigation methods are not significantly improving MDD treatment. It is therefore imperative to seek personalized methods for these interventions.
PubMed: 38902968
DOI: 10.1080/17434440.2024.2370820 -
Psychiatry Research Aug 2024The depression response trajectory after a course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation(rTMS) remains understudied. We searched for blinded randomized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The depression response trajectory after a course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation(rTMS) remains understudied. We searched for blinded randomized controlled trials(RCTs) that examined conventional rTMS over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex(DLPFC) for major depressive episodes(MDE). The effect size was calculated as the difference in depression improvement, between active and sham rTMS. We conducted a random-effects dose-response meta-analysis to model the response trajectory from the beginning of rTMS to the post-treatment follow-up phase. The area under curve (AUC) of the first 8-week response trajectory was calculated to compare antidepressant efficacy between different rTMS protocols. We included 40 RCTs(n = 2012). The best-fitting trajectory model exhibited a logarithmic curve(X=17.7, P < 0.001), showing a gradual ascent with tapering off around the 3-4th week mark and maintaining until week 16. The maximum effect size was 6.1(95 %CI: 1.25-10.96) at week 16. The subgroup analyses showed distinct trajectories across different rTMS protocols. Besides, the comparisons of AUC showed that conventional rTMS protocols with more pulse/session group or more total pulses were associated with greater efficacy than those with fewer pulse/session or fewer total pulses, respectively. A course of conventional left DLPFC rTMS could lead to both acute antidepressant effects and sustained after-effects, which were modeled by different rTMS protocols in MDE.
Topics: Humans; Depressive Disorder, Major; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex; Prefrontal Cortex; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38850891
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2024.115979 -
Molecular Psychiatry Jun 2024In clinical practice, theta burst stimulation (TBS) presents as a more efficient and potentially more effective therapeutic modality than conventional repetitive...
In clinical practice, theta burst stimulation (TBS) presents as a more efficient and potentially more effective therapeutic modality than conventional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), as it allows for the delivery of more stimuli in less time and at similar intensities. To date, accelerated treatment plans according to various continuous (cTBS) and intermittent TBS (iTBS) protocols for depression have been proposed. To investigate which of the TBS protocols provided a favorable risk-benefit balance for individuals with depression, this systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis was conducted. The study outcomes included response rate (primary), depression symptom improvement, remission rate, all-cause discontinuation rate, incidence of switch to mania, and incidence of headache/discomfort at treatment site. In this meta-analysis, a total of 23 randomized controlled trials (n = 960, mean age = 41.88 years, with 60.78% females) were included. Approximately 69.57% of the trials included individuals with an exclusive diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The following six TBS protocols (target) were evaluated: cTBS (right-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [R-DLPFC]), cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (left-DLPFC [L-DLPFC]), iTBS (L-DLPFC), iTBS (L-DLPFC) + iTBS (R-DLPFC), iTBS (left-dorsomedial prefrontal cortex) + iTBS (right-dorsomedial prefrontal cortex), and iTBS (occipital lobe). Compared to sham, cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (L-DLPFC), iTBS (L-DLPFC), and iTBS (occipital lobe) had a higher response rate (k = 23); cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (L-DLPFC) and iTBS (L-DLPFC) dominated in the depression symptom improvement (k = 23); and iTBS (L-DLPFC) had a higher remission rate (k = 15). No significant differences were found for all-cause discontinuation rate (k = 17), incidence of switch to mania (k = 7), and incidence of headache/discomfort at treatment site (k = 10) between any TBS protocols and sham. Thus, cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (L-DLPFC) and iTBS (L-DLPFC) demonstrate favorable risk-benefit balance for the treatment of depression.
PubMed: 38844532
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-024-02630-5 -
The Australian and New Zealand Journal... May 2024Studies using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy reveal substantial inconsistencies in the levels of brain glutamate, glutamine and glutamate + glutamine across... (Review)
Review
Glutamatergic neurotransmission in schizophrenia: A systematic review and quantitative synthesis of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy studies across schizophrenia spectrum disorders.
OBJECTIVE
Studies using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy reveal substantial inconsistencies in the levels of brain glutamate, glutamine and glutamate + glutamine across schizophrenia spectrum disorders. This systematic review employs qualitative and quantitative methods to analyse the patterns and relationships between glutamatergic metabolites, schizophrenia spectrum disorders and brain regions.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using various databases with keywords including glutamate, glutamine, schizophrenia, psychosis and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Inclusion criteria were limited to case-control studies that reported glutamatergic metabolite levels in adult patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder diagnosis - i.e. first-episode psychosis, schizophrenia, treatment-resistant schizophrenia and/or ultra-treatment-resistant schizophrenia - using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy at 3 T or above. Pooled study data were synthesized and analysed.
RESULTS
A total of 92 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 2721 healthy controls and 2822 schizophrenia spectrum disorder participants. Glu levels were higher in the basal ganglia, frontal cortex and medial prefrontal of first-episode psychosis participants, contrasting overall lower levels in schizophrenia participants. For Gln, strong differences in metabolite levels were evident in the basal ganglia, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and frontal cortex, with first-episode psychosis showing significantly higher levels in the basal ganglia. In glutamate + glutamine, higher metabolite levels were found across schizophrenia spectrum disorder groups, particularly in the basal ganglia and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of treatment-resistant schizophrenia participants. Significant relationships were found between metabolite levels and medication status, clinical measures and methodological variables.
CONCLUSION
The review highlights abnormal glutamatergic metabolite levels throughout schizophrenia spectrum disorders and in specific brain regions. The review underscores the importance of standardized future research assessing glutamatergic metabolites using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy due to considerable literature heterogeneity.
PubMed: 38812258
DOI: 10.1177/00048674241254216 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) accounts for approximately 43% of frontotemporal dementias and is mainly characterised by a progressive impairment of speech and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) accounts for approximately 43% of frontotemporal dementias and is mainly characterised by a progressive impairment of speech and communication abilities. Three clinical variants have been identified: (a) non-fluent/agrammatic, (b) semantic, and (c) logopenic/phonological PPA variants. There is currently no curative treatment for PPA, and the disease progresses inexorably over time, with devastating effects on speech and communication ability, functional status, and quality of life. Several non-pharmacological interventions that may improve symptoms (e.g. different forms of language training and non-invasive brain stimulation) have been investigated in people with PPA.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of non-pharmacological interventions for people with PPA on word retrieval (our primary outcome), global language functions, cognition, quality of life, and adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's trial register, MEDLINE (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid SP), four other databases and two other trial registers. The latest searches were run on 26 January 2024.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in people with PPA.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
There were insufficient data available to conduct the network meta-analyses that we had originally planned (due to trial data being insufficiently reported or not reported at all, as well as the heterogeneous content of the included interventions). Therefore, we provide a descriptive summary of the included studies and results. We included 10 studies, with a total of 132 participants, evaluating non-pharmacological interventions. These were: transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as stand-alone treatments (used by two and one studies, respectively); tDCS combined with semantic and phonological word-retrieval training (five studies); tDCS combined with semantic word-retrieval training (one study); and tDCS combined with phonological word-retrieval training (one study). Results for our primary outcome of word retrieval were mixed. For the two studies that investigated the effects of tDCS as stand-alone treatment compared to placebo ("sham") tDCS, we rated the results as having very low-certainty evidence. One study found a significant beneficial effect on word retrieval after active tDCS; one study did not report any significant effects in favour of the active tDCS group. Five studies investigated tDCS administered to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, inferior frontal cortex, left frontotemporal region, or the temporoparietal cortex, combined with semantic and phonological word-retrieval training. The most consistent finding was enhancement of word-retrieval ability for trained items immediately after the intervention, when behavioural training was combined with active tDCS compared to behavioural training plus sham tDCS. We found mixed effects for untrained items and maintenance of treatment effects during follow-up assessments. We rated the certainty of the evidence as very low in all studies. One study investigated tDCS combined with semantic word-retrieval training. Training was provided across 15 sessions with a frequency of three to five sessions per week, depending on the personal preferences of the participants. tDCS targeted the left frontotemporal region. The study included three participants: two received 1 mA stimulation and one received 2 mA stimulation. The study showed mixed results. We rated it as very low-certainty evidence. One study investigated tDCS combined with phonological word-retrieval training. Training was again provided across 15 sessions over a period of three weeks. tDCS targeted the left inferior frontal gyrus. This study showed a significantly more pronounced improvement for trained and untrained words in favour of the group that had received active tDCS, but we rated the certainty of the evidence as very low. One study compared active rTMS applied to an individually determined target site to active rTMS applied to a control site (vertex) for effects on participants' word retrieval. This study demonstrated better word retrieval for active rTMS administered to individually determined target brain regions than in the control intervention, but we rated the results as having a very low certainty of evidence. Four studies assessed overall language ability, three studies assessed cognition, five studies assessed potential adverse effects of brain stimulation, and one study investigated quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is currently no high-certainty evidence to inform clinical decision-making regarding non-pharmacological treatment selection for people with PPA. Preliminary evidence suggests that the combination of active tDCS with specific language therapy may improve impaired word retrieval for specifically trained items beyond the effects of behavioural treatment alone. However, more research is needed, including high-quality RCTs with detailed descriptions of participants and methods, and consideration of outcomes such as quality of life, depressive symptoms, and overall cognitive functioning. Moreover, studies assessing optimal treatments (i.e. behavioural interventions, brain stimulation interventions, and their combinations) for individual patients and PPA subtypes are needed. We were not able to conduct the planned (network) meta-analyses due to missing data that could not be obtained from most of the authors, a general lack of RCTs in the field, and heterogeneous interventions in eligible trials. Journals should implement a mandatory data-sharing requirement to assure transparency and accessibility of data from clinical trials.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Middle Aged; Aphasia, Primary Progressive; Bias; Cognition; Communication; Language; Language Therapy; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
PubMed: 38808659
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015067.pub2 -
Journal of Neurology May 2024Loss of dorsolateral nigral hyperintensity (DNH) on iron-sensitive brain MRI is useful for Parkinson's disease detection. DNH loss could also be of diagnostic value in... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Loss of dorsolateral nigral hyperintensity (DNH) on iron-sensitive brain MRI is useful for Parkinson's disease detection. DNH loss could also be of diagnostic value in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), an a-synuclein-related pathology. We aim to quantitatively synthesize evidence, investigating the role of MRI, a first-line imaging modality, in early DLB detection and differentiation from other dementias.
METHODS
Our study was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched using the terms like "dementia with Lewy bodies", "dorsolateral nigral hyperintensity", and "MRI". Only English-written peer-reviewed diagnostic accuracy studies were included. We used QUADAS-2 for quality assessment.
RESULTS
Our search yielded 363 search results. Three studies were eligible, all with satisfying, high quality. The total population of 227 patients included 63 with DLB and 164 with other diseases (Alzheimer disease, frontotemporal dementia, mild cognitive impairment). Using a univariate random-effects logistic regression model, our meta-analysis resulted in pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR of 0.82 [0.62; 0.92], 0.79 [0.70; 0.86] and 16.26 ([3.3276; 79.4702], p = 0.0006), respectively, for scans with mixed field strength (1.5 and 3 T). Subgroup analysis of 3 T scans showed pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR of 0.82 [0.61; 0.93], 0.82 [0.72; 0.89] and 18.36 ([4.24; 79.46], p < 0.0001), respectively.
DISCUSSION
DNH loss on iron-sensitive MRI might comprise a supportive biomarker for DLB detection, that could augment the value of the DLB diagnostic criteria. Further evaluation using standardized protocols is needed, as well as direct comparison to other supportive and indicative biomarkers.
PubMed: 38801432
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-024-12381-6 -
JAMA Network Open May 2024Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) interventions have been shown to be efficacious in several mental disorders, but the optimal dose stimulation parameters for each... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) interventions have been shown to be efficacious in several mental disorders, but the optimal dose stimulation parameters for each disorder are unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To define NIBS dose stimulation parameters associated with the greatest efficacy in symptom improvement across mental disorders.
DATA SOURCES
Studies were drawn from an updated (to April 30, 2023) previous systematic review based on a search of PubMed, OVID, and Web of Knowledge.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials were selected that tested transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for any mental disorder in adults aged 18 years or older.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two authors independently extracted the data. A 1-stage dose-response meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test robustness of the findings. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The main outcome was the near-maximal effective doses of total pulses received for TMS and total current dose in coulombs for tDCS.
RESULTS
A total of 110 studies with 4820 participants (2659 men [61.4%]; mean [SD] age, 42.3 [8.8] years) were included. The following significant dose-response associations emerged with bell-shaped curves: (1) in schizophrenia, high-frequency (HF) TMS on the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (LDLPFC) for negative symptoms (χ2 = 9.35; df = 2; P = .009) and TMS on the left temporoparietal junction for resistant hallucinations (χ2 = 36.52; df = 2; P < .001); (2) in depression, HF-DLPFC TMS (χ2 = 14.49; df = 2; P < .001); (3) in treatment-resistant depression, LDLPFC tDCS (χ2 = 14.56; df = 2; P < .001); and (4) in substance use disorder, LDLPFC tDCS (χ2 = 33.63; df = 2; P < .001). The following significant dose-response associations emerged with plateaued or ascending curves: (1) in depression, low-frequency (LF) TMS on the right DLPFC (RDLPFC) with ascending curve (χ2 = 25.67; df = 2; P = .001); (2) for treatment-resistant depression, LF TMS on the bilateral DLPFC with ascending curve (χ2 = 5.86; df = 2; P = .004); (3) in obsessive-compulsive disorder, LF-RDLPFC TMS with ascending curve (χ2 = 20.65; df = 2; P < .001) and LF TMS on the orbitofrontal cortex with a plateaued curve (χ2 = 15.19; df = 2; P < .001); and (4) in posttraumatic stress disorder, LF-RDLPFC TMS with ascending curve (χ2 = 54.15; df = 2; P < .001). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main findings.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The study findings suggest that NIBS yields specific outcomes based on dose parameters across various mental disorders and brain regions. Clinicians should consider these dose parameters when prescribing NIBS. Additional research is needed to prospectively validate the findings in randomized, sham-controlled trials and explore how other parameters contribute to the observed dose-response association.
Topics: Humans; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; Mental Disorders; Adult; Male; Female; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38776083
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.12616