IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Acta neurologica Belgica Pub Date : 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1007/s13760-025-02740-z
Abdallah Abbas, Mohamed Abouzid, Haneen Sabet, Ahmed Mansour, Abdelfattah Arafa, Ahmed Elshahat, Ahmed Mostafa Amin, Mahmoud Tarek Hefnawy, Mohamed El-Moslemani, Amna Hussein, Mostafa Hossam El Din Moawad, Shereen M Olama, Ahmed Badry Shehata, Mahmoud G A Saleh, Ahmad Farag Ibrahim El-Adawy, Ahmed M Raslan, Mostafa Meshref
{"title":"Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation in essential tremor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy.","authors":"Abdallah Abbas, Mohamed Abouzid, Haneen Sabet, Ahmed Mansour, Abdelfattah Arafa, Ahmed Elshahat, Ahmed Mostafa Amin, Mahmoud Tarek Hefnawy, Mohamed El-Moslemani, Amna Hussein, Mostafa Hossam El Din Moawad, Shereen M Olama, Ahmed Badry Shehata, Mahmoud G A Saleh, Ahmad Farag Ibrahim El-Adawy, Ahmed M Raslan, Mostafa Meshref","doi":"10.1007/s13760-025-02740-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Essential tremor (ET) is a common neurological disorder that significantly impacts daily activities. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cerebellar repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and cerebellar Theta Burst Stimulation (TBS) in treating ET.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched through June 14, 2024, four databases (Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL) to identify clinical trials investigating cerebellar rTMS or TBS in ET patients. Eligibility criteria included clinical trials reporting on safety and efficacy outcomes. Six reviewers screened and extracted data independently, resolving conflicts through consensus. Risk of bias was assessed. Statistical analyses involved pooling continuous outcomes using the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with RevMan 5.3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 201 screened studies, nine studies were included, with a total of 261 participants (149 received rTMS, 112 were in control groups). The meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between rTMS and sham groups for Fahn-Tolosa-Marin (FTM) subscores A (MD: -3.03, 95% CI: [-7.66, 1.60], P = 0.20), B (MD: -2.74, 95% CI: [-8.09, 2.61], P = 0.32), C (MD: -1.57, 95% CI: [-5.12, 1.97], P = 0.38), and FTM-Total (MD: -8.12, 95% CI: [-20.47, 4.23], P = 0.20). Sensitivity analysis confirmed these results. Adverse events were minimal: headaches (1/44 rTMS, 2/19 sham), dizziness (1/44 rTMS, 0/19 sham), and no reported seizures or syncope.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While individual studies noted significant FTM score improvements post-rTMS treatment, the pooled analysis found no significant differences versus sham. Further research with standardized protocols and larger samples is required to optimize rTMS use for ET.</p>","PeriodicalId":7042,"journal":{"name":"Acta neurologica Belgica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta neurologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13760-025-02740-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景介绍本质性震颤(ET)是一种常见的神经系统疾病,严重影响日常活动。本荟萃分析旨在评估小脑重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)和小脑θ脉冲刺激(TBS)治疗ET的安全性和有效性:我们在 2024 年 6 月 14 日前检索了四个数据库(Scopus、PubMed、Web of Science 和 Cochrane CENTRAL),以确定研究小脑经颅磁刺激或 TBS 治疗 ET 患者的临床试验。资格标准包括报告安全性和疗效结果的临床试验。六位审稿人独立筛选并提取数据,通过协商一致解决冲突。对偏倚风险进行了评估。统计分析采用RevMan 5.3的平均差(MD)和95%置信区间(CI)对连续结果进行汇总:在筛选出的 201 项研究中,纳入了 9 项研究,共有 261 人参与(149 人接受了经颅磁刺激,112 人属于对照组)。荟萃分析表明,经颅磁刺激与假体组在法恩-托洛萨-马林(FTM)子评分 A(MD:-3.03,95% CI:[-7.66,1.60],P = 0.20)、B(MD:-2.74,95% CI:[-8.09,2.61],P = 0.32)、C(MD:-1.57,95% CI:[-5.12,1.97],P = 0.38)和 FTM 总分(MD:-8.12,95% CI:[-20.47,4.23],P = 0.20)。敏感性分析证实了这些结果。不良事件极少:头痛(1/44 次经颅磁刺激,2/19 次假性经颅磁刺激)、头晕(1/44 次经颅磁刺激,0/19 次假性经颅磁刺激),没有癫痫发作或晕厥的报道:结论:虽然个别研究指出经颅磁刺激治疗后 FTM 评分有明显改善,但汇总分析发现,经颅磁刺激治疗与假治疗相比没有明显差异。要优化经颅磁刺激治疗 ET 的使用,还需要进一步开展标准化方案和更大样本量的研究。
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
Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation in essential tremor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy.

Background: Essential tremor (ET) is a common neurological disorder that significantly impacts daily activities. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cerebellar repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and cerebellar Theta Burst Stimulation (TBS) in treating ET.

Methods: We searched through June 14, 2024, four databases (Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL) to identify clinical trials investigating cerebellar rTMS or TBS in ET patients. Eligibility criteria included clinical trials reporting on safety and efficacy outcomes. Six reviewers screened and extracted data independently, resolving conflicts through consensus. Risk of bias was assessed. Statistical analyses involved pooling continuous outcomes using the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with RevMan 5.3.

Results: Out of 201 screened studies, nine studies were included, with a total of 261 participants (149 received rTMS, 112 were in control groups). The meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between rTMS and sham groups for Fahn-Tolosa-Marin (FTM) subscores A (MD: -3.03, 95% CI: [-7.66, 1.60], P = 0.20), B (MD: -2.74, 95% CI: [-8.09, 2.61], P = 0.32), C (MD: -1.57, 95% CI: [-5.12, 1.97], P = 0.38), and FTM-Total (MD: -8.12, 95% CI: [-20.47, 4.23], P = 0.20). Sensitivity analysis confirmed these results. Adverse events were minimal: headaches (1/44 rTMS, 2/19 sham), dizziness (1/44 rTMS, 0/19 sham), and no reported seizures or syncope.

Conclusion: While individual studies noted significant FTM score improvements post-rTMS treatment, the pooled analysis found no significant differences versus sham. Further research with standardized protocols and larger samples is required to optimize rTMS use for ET.

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
Acta neurologica Belgica
Acta neurologica Belgica 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
300
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Peer-reviewed and published quarterly, Acta Neurologica Belgicapresents original articles in the clinical and basic neurosciences, and also reports the proceedings and the abstracts of the scientific meetings of the different partner societies. The contents include commentaries, editorials, review articles, case reports, neuro-images of interest, book reviews and letters to the editor. Acta Neurologica Belgica is the official journal of the following national societies: Belgian Neurological Society Belgian Society for Neuroscience Belgian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology Belgian Pediatric Neurology Society Belgian Study Group of Multiple Sclerosis Belgian Stroke Council Belgian Headache Society Belgian Study Group of Neuropathology
期刊最新文献
Circulating miR-223/NLRP3 axis and IL-1β level in functional disease progression of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Characterization of nerve biopsy in copper deficiency peripheral neuropathy due to over-treatment of Wilson's disease: A case report. Survival outcomes among hospitalized patients with dementia: a propensity score matching analysis. Uncovering heterogeneous cognitive trajectories in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a longitudinal study. Etiologic spectrum and neurological outcomes in pediatric arterial ischemic stroke and cerebral sinovenous thrombosis: A 15-Year retrospective study at a tertiary hospital.
×
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