非侵入性皮质刺激治疗耐药疼痛。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1097/SPC.0000000000000654
Luis Garcia-Larrea
{"title":"非侵入性皮质刺激治疗耐药疼痛。","authors":"Luis Garcia-Larrea","doi":"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Neuromodulation techniques are being increasingly used to alleviate pain and enhance quality of life. Non-invasive cortical stimulation was originally intended to predict the efficacy of invasive (neurosurgical) techniques, but has now gained a place as an analgesic procedure in its own right.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): Evidence from 14 randomised, placebo-controlled trials (~750 patients) supports a significant analgesic effect of high-frequency motor cortex rTMS in neuropathic pain. Dorsolateral frontal stimulation has not proven efficacious so far. The posterior operculo-insular cortex is an attractive target but evidence remains insufficient. Short-term efficacy can be achieved with NNT (numbers needed to treat) ~2-3, but long-lasting efficacy remains a challenge.Like rTMS, transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) induces activity changes in distributed brain networks and can influence various aspects of pain. Lower cost relative to rTMS, few safety issues and availability of home-based protocols are practical advantages. The limited quality of many published reports lowers the level of evidence, which will remain uncertain until more prospective controlled studies are available.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Both rTMS and tDCS act preferentially upon abnormal hyperexcitable states of pain, rather than acute or experimental pain. For both techniques, M1 appears to be the best target for chronic pain relief, and repeated sessions over relatively long periods of time may be required to obtain clinically significant benefits. Patients responsive to tDCS may differ from those improved by rTMS.</p>","PeriodicalId":48837,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-invasive cortical stimulation for drug-resistant pain.\",\"authors\":\"Luis Garcia-Larrea\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000654\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Neuromodulation techniques are being increasingly used to alleviate pain and enhance quality of life. Non-invasive cortical stimulation was originally intended to predict the efficacy of invasive (neurosurgical) techniques, but has now gained a place as an analgesic procedure in its own right.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): Evidence from 14 randomised, placebo-controlled trials (~750 patients) supports a significant analgesic effect of high-frequency motor cortex rTMS in neuropathic pain. Dorsolateral frontal stimulation has not proven efficacious so far. The posterior operculo-insular cortex is an attractive target but evidence remains insufficient. Short-term efficacy can be achieved with NNT (numbers needed to treat) ~2-3, but long-lasting efficacy remains a challenge.Like rTMS, transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) induces activity changes in distributed brain networks and can influence various aspects of pain. Lower cost relative to rTMS, few safety issues and availability of home-based protocols are practical advantages. The limited quality of many published reports lowers the level of evidence, which will remain uncertain until more prospective controlled studies are available.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Both rTMS and tDCS act preferentially upon abnormal hyperexcitable states of pain, rather than acute or experimental pain. For both techniques, M1 appears to be the best target for chronic pain relief, and repeated sessions over relatively long periods of time may be required to obtain clinically significant benefits. Patients responsive to tDCS may differ from those improved by rTMS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000654\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000654","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

综述目的:神经调节技术越来越多地用于减轻疼痛和提高生活质量。非侵入性皮质刺激最初是为了预测侵入性(神经外科)技术的疗效,但现在已经作为一种镇痛手段获得了一席之地。最近发现:重复性经颅磁刺激(rTMS):来自14个随机、安慰剂对照试验(约750例患者)的证据支持高频运动皮质rTMS对神经性疼痛的显著镇痛作用。迄今为止,背外侧额叶刺激尚未被证明有效。后盖岛皮层是一个有吸引力的目标,但证据仍然不足。NNT(治疗所需的数量)2 ~ 3个可以达到短期疗效,但长期疗效仍然是一个挑战。与rTMS一样,经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)可以诱导分布式脑网络的活动变化,并可以影响疼痛的各个方面。与rTMS相比,成本较低,安全问题少,家庭协议的可用性具有实际优势。许多已发表的报告质量有限,降低了证据水平,在获得更多前瞻性对照研究之前,证据水平仍不确定。摘要:rTMS和tDCS都优先作用于异常的超兴奋状态疼痛,而不是急性或实验性疼痛。对于这两种技术,M1似乎是缓解慢性疼痛的最佳靶点,并且可能需要在相对较长的时间内重复会话才能获得临床显着的益处。对tDCS有反应的患者可能不同于经rTMS改善的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Non-invasive cortical stimulation for drug-resistant pain.

Purpose of review: Neuromodulation techniques are being increasingly used to alleviate pain and enhance quality of life. Non-invasive cortical stimulation was originally intended to predict the efficacy of invasive (neurosurgical) techniques, but has now gained a place as an analgesic procedure in its own right.

Recent findings: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): Evidence from 14 randomised, placebo-controlled trials (~750 patients) supports a significant analgesic effect of high-frequency motor cortex rTMS in neuropathic pain. Dorsolateral frontal stimulation has not proven efficacious so far. The posterior operculo-insular cortex is an attractive target but evidence remains insufficient. Short-term efficacy can be achieved with NNT (numbers needed to treat) ~2-3, but long-lasting efficacy remains a challenge.Like rTMS, transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) induces activity changes in distributed brain networks and can influence various aspects of pain. Lower cost relative to rTMS, few safety issues and availability of home-based protocols are practical advantages. The limited quality of many published reports lowers the level of evidence, which will remain uncertain until more prospective controlled studies are available.

Summary: Both rTMS and tDCS act preferentially upon abnormal hyperexcitable states of pain, rather than acute or experimental pain. For both techniques, M1 appears to be the best target for chronic pain relief, and repeated sessions over relatively long periods of time may be required to obtain clinically significant benefits. Patients responsive to tDCS may differ from those improved by rTMS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: A reader-friendly resource, Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care provides an up-to-date account of the most important advances in the field of supportive and palliative care. Each issue contains either two or three sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive coverage of all the key issues, including end-of-life management, gastrointestinal systems and respiratory problems. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.
期刊最新文献
Advances in breathlessness support services for people with serious illness. Bridging the care gap: radiation therapy in elderly and frail cancer patients. The gut microbiome and the brain. Is there a role for capsaicin in Cancer pain management? Comparing the EORTC QLQ-LC13, EORTC QLQ-LC29, and the FACT-L for assessment of quality of life in patients with lung cancer - an updated systematic review.
×
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