Literature DB >> 19424444

Development and evaluation of a portable sham transcranial magnetic stimulation system.

Jeffrey J Borckardt1, John Walker, R Kyle Branham, Sofia Rydin-Gray, Caroline Hunter, Heather Beeson, Scott T Reeves, Alok Madan, Harold Sackeim, Mark S George.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a relatively noninvasive brain stimulation technology that can focally stimulate the human cortex. One significant limitation of much of the TMS research to date concerns the nature of the placebo or sham conditions used. When TMS pulses are delivered repetitively (especially prefrontal TMS), it is often experienced as painful. Most sham TMS techniques produce identical sounds to active TMS, but they do not cause much, if any, scalp or facial sensation or discomfort. This is a serious problem when investigators are attempting to evaluate the effects of TMS by using traditional sham techniques because of unintended systematic differences between real and sham TMS groups (ie, confounds). As long as traditional approaches to sham TMS are used, the validity of the inferences regarding the efficacy of TMS will be limited. Although some other sophisticated systems have been developed to address these concerns, they tend to be expensive and lack portability. Portability will likely become more and more important as TMS applications expand into different clinical areas (eg, TMS in the postanesthesia care unit after surgery).
METHODS: This study describes a portable electrical TMS sham system (eSham system) modeled after the James Long System that was designed to produce similar scalp sensations as real TMS. Preliminary results are presented on 9 healthy adults who received both real and eSham 10 Hz repetitive TMS (rTMS) (at 80%, 100%, and 120% of resting motor threshold) over the prefrontal cortex and rated the sensation quality (pain, tingling, sharpness, piercing, electric, tugging, pinching), tolerability, and location.
RESULTS: Real TMS and eSham TMS were rated similarly across all seven sensory dimensions examined. Real and eSham TMS were also rated similarly with respect to tolerability and perceived location of the TMS-induced sensations.
CONCLUSIONS: The eSham system may be a simple, affordable, and portable approach to providing convincing sham TMS for future clinical trials. This study provides preliminary evidence supporting the use of the eSham system. Future larger-scale studies are warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19424444      PMCID: PMC2677803          DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2007.09.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Stimul        ISSN: 1876-4754            Impact factor:   8.955


  21 in total

1.  Slow-frequency rTMS reduces fibromyalgia pain.

Authors:  Shirlene M Sampson; Jeffrey D Rome; Teresa A Rummans
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.750

2.  Changes to cold detection and pain thresholds following low and high frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex.

Authors:  Jeff Summers; Sama Johnson; Saxby Pridmore; Gajinder Oberoi
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2004-09-23       Impact factor: 3.046

3.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex increases tolerance to human experimental pain.

Authors:  Ariel Graff-Guerrero; Jorge González-Olvera; Ana Fresán; Diana Gómez-Martín; Juan Carlos Méndez-Núñez; Francisco Pellicer
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  2005-09

4.  Estimating resting motor thresholds in transcranial magnetic stimulation research and practice: a computer simulation evaluation of best methods.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Borckardt; Ziad Nahas; Jejo Koola; Mark S George
Journal:  J ECT       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.635

5.  Postoperative left prefrontal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation reduces patient-controlled analgesia use.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Borckardt; Mitchel Weinstein; Scott T Reeves; F Andrew Kozel; Ziad Nahas; Arthur R Smith; T Karl Byrne; Katherine Morgan; Mark S George
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  Non-invasive magnetic stimulation of human motor cortex.

Authors:  A T Barker; R Jalinous; I L Freeston
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-05-11       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  A real electro-magnetic placebo (REMP) device for sham transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).

Authors:  Simone Rossi; Marisa Ferro; Massimo Cincotta; Monica Ulivelli; Sabina Bartalini; Carlo Miniussi; Fabio Giovannelli; Stefano Passero
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-12-22       Impact factor: 3.708

8.  Longlasting antalgic effects of daily sessions of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in central and peripheral neuropathic pain.

Authors:  E M Khedr; H Kotb; N F Kamel; M A Ahmed; R Sadek; J C Rothwell
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 10.154

9.  Transcranial magnetic coil stimulation of motor cortex in patients with central pain.

Authors:  K Migita; T Uozumi; K Arita; S Monden
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Transcranial magnetic cortical stimulation relieves central pain.

Authors:  S Canavero; V Bonicalzi; M Dotta; S Vighetti; G Asteggiano; D Cocito
Journal:  Stereotact Funct Neurosurg       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.875

View more
  24 in total

1.  Fast left prefrontal rTMS acutely suppresses analgesic effects of perceived controllability on the emotional component of pain experience.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Borckardt; Scott T Reeves; Heather Frohman; Alok Madan; Mark P Jensen; David Patterson; Kelly Barth; A Richard Smith; Richard Gracely; Mark S George
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 6.961

2.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over frontal eye fields disrupts visually cued auditory attention.

Authors:  Daniel T Smith; Stephen R Jackson; Chris Rorden
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 8.955

3.  Broca's area is crucial for visual discrimination of speech but not non-speech oral movements.

Authors:  Christopher Rorden; Ben Davis; Mark S George; Jeffrey Borckardt; Julius Fridriksson
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.955

Review 4.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of substance addiction.

Authors:  David A Gorelick; Abraham Zangen; Mark S George
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2014-07-28       Impact factor: 5.691

5.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex reduces resting-state insula activity and modulates functional connectivity of the orbitofrontal cortex in cigarette smokers.

Authors:  Xingbao Li; Lian Du; Gregory L Sahlem; Bashar W Badran; Scott Henderson; Mark S George
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 4.492

6.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) administration to heavy cannabis users.

Authors:  Gregory L Sahlem; Nathaniel L Baker; Mark S George; Robert J Malcolm; Aimee L McRae-Clark
Journal:  Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 3.829

7.  A randomized, controlled investigation of motor cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) effects on quantitative sensory measures in healthy adults: evaluation of TMS device parameters.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Borckardt; Scott T Reeves; Will Beam; Mark P Jensen; Richard H Gracely; Sophie Katz; Arthur R Smith; Alok Madan; David Patterson; Mark S George
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.442

8.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex reduces nicotine cue craving.

Authors:  Xingbao Li; Karen J Hartwell; Max Owens; Todd Lematty; Jeffrey J Borckardt; Colleen A Hanlon; Kathleen T Brady; Mark S George
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 13.382

9.  Focal electrical stimulation as an effective sham control for active rTMS and biofeedback treatments.

Authors:  Christine E Sheffer; Mark S Mennemeier; Reid D Landes; John Dornhoffer; Timothy Kimbrell; Warren K Bickel; Sharon Brackman; Kenneth C Chelette; Ginger Brown; Mai Vuong
Journal:  Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback       Date:  2013-09

Review 10.  The Clinical TMS Society Consensus Review and Treatment Recommendations for TMS Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder.

Authors:  Tarique Perera; Mark S George; Geoffrey Grammer; Philip G Janicak; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Theodore S Wirecki
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 8.955

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.