Efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in the treatment of fibromyalgia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.neucli.2024.102944
Chun-Lan Yang , Yun Qu , Jia-Peng Huang , Ting-Ting Wang , Han Zhang , Yin Chen , Ying-Chao Tan
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in the treatment of fibromyalgia: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Chun-Lan Yang ,&nbsp;Yun Qu ,&nbsp;Jia-Peng Huang ,&nbsp;Ting-Ting Wang ,&nbsp;Han Zhang ,&nbsp;Yin Chen ,&nbsp;Ying-Chao Tan","doi":"10.1016/j.neucli.2024.102944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To update a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for analgesia, for antidepressant effects, and to reduce the impact of fibromyalgia (FM), looking for optimal areas of stimulation.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We searched five databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing active and sham tDCS for FM. The primary outcome was pain intensity, and secondary outcome measures included FM Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) and depression score. Meta-analysis was conducted using standardized mean difference (SMD). Subgroup analysis was performed to determine the effects of different regional stimulation, over the primary motor cortex (M1), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), opercular-insular cortex (OIC), and occipital nerve (ON) regions. We analyzed the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by the value of the mean difference (MD) for an 11-point scale for pain, the Beck Depressive Inventory-II (BDI-II), and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) score. We described the certainty of the evidence (COE) using the tool <em>GRADE profile.</em></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty studies were included in the analysis. Active tDCS had a positive effect on pain (SMD= -1.04; 95 % CI -1.38 to -0.69), depression (SMD= -0.46; 95 % CI -0.64 to -0.29), FIQ (SMD= -0.73; 95 % CI -1.09 to –0.36), COE is moderate. Only group M1 (SD=-1.57) and DLPFC (SD=-1.44) could achieve MCID for analgesia; For BDI-II, only group DLPFC (SD=-5.36) could achieve an MCID change. Adverse events were mild.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>tDCS is a safe intervention that relieves pain intensity, reduces depression, and reduces the impact of FM on life. Achieving an MCID is related to the stimulation site and the target symptom.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19134,"journal":{"name":"Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology","volume":"54 1","pages":"Article 102944"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0987705324000029/pdfft?md5=bb20761e234970c2f17d77b6b91d83d4&pid=1-s2.0-S0987705324000029-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0987705324000029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

To update a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for analgesia, for antidepressant effects, and to reduce the impact of fibromyalgia (FM), looking for optimal areas of stimulation.

Methods

We searched five databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing active and sham tDCS for FM. The primary outcome was pain intensity, and secondary outcome measures included FM Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) and depression score. Meta-analysis was conducted using standardized mean difference (SMD). Subgroup analysis was performed to determine the effects of different regional stimulation, over the primary motor cortex (M1), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), opercular-insular cortex (OIC), and occipital nerve (ON) regions. We analyzed the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by the value of the mean difference (MD) for an 11-point scale for pain, the Beck Depressive Inventory-II (BDI-II), and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) score. We described the certainty of the evidence (COE) using the tool GRADE profile.

Results

Twenty studies were included in the analysis. Active tDCS had a positive effect on pain (SMD= -1.04; 95 % CI -1.38 to -0.69), depression (SMD= -0.46; 95 % CI -0.64 to -0.29), FIQ (SMD= -0.73; 95 % CI -1.09 to –0.36), COE is moderate. Only group M1 (SD=-1.57) and DLPFC (SD=-1.44) could achieve MCID for analgesia; For BDI-II, only group DLPFC (SD=-5.36) could achieve an MCID change. Adverse events were mild.

Conclusion

tDCS is a safe intervention that relieves pain intensity, reduces depression, and reduces the impact of FM on life. Achieving an MCID is related to the stimulation site and the target symptom.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经颅直流电刺激治疗纤维肌痛的有效性和安全性:系统回顾与荟萃分析
目的对经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)镇痛、抗抑郁以及减轻纤维肌痛(FM)影响的疗效和安全性进行系统综述,寻找最佳刺激区域。主要结果为疼痛强度,次要结果包括FM影响问卷(FIQ)和抑郁评分。采用标准化平均差(SMD)进行了元分析。我们进行了分组分析,以确定不同区域刺激对初级运动皮层(M1)、背外侧前额叶皮层(DLPFC)、厣肌-岛叶皮层(OIC)和枕神经(ON)区域的影响。我们通过疼痛 11 分量表、贝克抑郁清单-II (BDI-II) 和纤维肌痛影响问卷 (FIQ) 评分的平均差 (MD) 值来分析最小临床重要差异 (MCID)。我们使用 GRADE 工具描述了证据的确定性(COE)。有源 tDCS 对疼痛(SMD=-1.04;95 % CI -1.38 to -0.69)、抑郁(SMD=-0.46;95 % CI -0.64 to -0.29)和 FIQ(SMD=-0.73;95 % CI -1.09 to -0.36)有积极影响,COE 为中等。只有 M1 组(SD=-1.57)和 DLPFC 组(SD=-1.44)的镇痛效果达到 MCID;对于 BDI-II,只有 DLPFC 组(SD=-5.36)的变化达到 MCID。结论TDCS是一种安全的干预措施,能缓解疼痛强度、减轻抑郁、减少FM对生活的影响。MCID的实现与刺激部位和目标症状有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
55
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Neurophysiologie Clinique / Clinical Neurophysiology (NCCN) is the official organ of the French Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (SNCLF). This journal is published 6 times a year, and is aimed at an international readership, with articles written in English. These can take the form of original research papers, comprehensive review articles, viewpoints, short communications, technical notes, editorials or letters to the Editor. The theme is the neurophysiological investigation of central or peripheral nervous system or muscle in healthy humans or patients. The journal focuses on key areas of clinical neurophysiology: electro- or magneto-encephalography, evoked potentials of all modalities, electroneuromyography, sleep, pain, posture, balance, motor control, autonomic nervous system, cognition, invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation, signal processing, bio-engineering, functional imaging.
期刊最新文献
The epileptogenic network concept: Applications in the SEEG exploration of lesional focal epilepsies F-waves responses derived from low-intensity electrical stimulation: A method to explore split-hand pathogenesis Transcranial MEPs predict clinical outcome during minimally invasive dorsal decompression for cervical spondylotic myelopathy Twenty years of SIRPIDs: What have we learned? Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on tinnitus modulation: A randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled clinical trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1