Safety and efficacy of targeting the supplementary motor area with double-cone deep transcranial magnetic stimulation vs figure-eight coil in treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder with comorbid major depressive disorder

Abstract

Background and objective

The Supplementary Motor Area (SMA), a relatively large brain structure predominantly located along the interhemispheric fissure, is an established target for repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) treatment of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). We investigated the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of targeting SMA using a double-cone “deep” TMS coil compared to conventional figure-eight coil for treatment of OCD with comorbid Major Depressive Disorder (MDD).

Methods

Sixty-two patients with treatment-resistant OCD and comorbid MDD participated in the study. All patients received high-frequency rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) with a figure-eight coil (MagVenture B70), followed by 1 Hz rTMS over the bilateral SMA using either the B70 (N = 25) or double-cone deep coil (MagVenture DB80) (n = 23) for 36 treatment sessions. Weekly clinical assessments were conducted.

Results

Subjects overall had significant reductions in OCD and depressive symptom severity at the primary endpoint. Subjects stimulated at SMA with the double-cone deep coil had statistically significantly lesser reductions in overall OCD and depression symptom severity compared to the figure-eight group. The intensity of stimulation at SMA was significantly greater with the double-cone deep than figure-eight coil and e-field modeling showed that it affected broader regions beyond SMA (off-target stimulation). There was no significant difference in reported tolerability between groups.

Conclusions

SMA stimulation using either a double-cone deep or conventional figure-of-eight coil was safe and was associated with a significant reduction in comorbid OCD and depression symptoms, but the higher intensities of stimulation with the double-cone deep coil used in this study were significantly less clinically beneficial than figure-eight coil stimulation.