Ahmed E Hussein1, Darian R Esfahani1, Galina I Moisak2, Jamil A Rzaev2, Konstantin V Slavin3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, 912 South Wood Street, 451-N NPI, (MC 799), Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. 2. Federal Neurosurgical Center of Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, 912 South Wood Street, 451-N NPI, (MC 799), Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. kslavin@uic.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since the early 1990s, motor cortex stimulation (MCS) has been a unique treatment modality for patients with drug-resistant deafferentation pain. While underpowered studies and case reports have limited definitive, data-driven analysis of MCS in the past, recent research has brought new clarity to the MCS literature and has helped identify appropriate indications for MCS and its long-term efficacy. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review, new research in MCS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are analyzed and compared with historical landmark papers. Currently, MCS is effective in providing relief to 40-64% of patients, with decreasing analgesic effect over time addressed by altering stimulation settings. rTMS and tDCS, two historic, non-invasive stimulation techniques, are providing new alternatives for the treatment of deafferentation pain, with rTMS finding utility in identifying MCS responders. Future advances in electrode arrays, neuro-navigation, and high-definition tDCS hold promise in providing pain relief to growing numbers of patients. Deafferentation pain is severe, disabling, and remains a challenge for patients and providers alike. Over the last several years, the MCS literature has been revitalized with studies and meta-analyses demonstrating MCS effectiveness and providing guidance in identifying responders. At the same time, rTMS and tDCS, two time-honored non-invasive stimulation techniques, are finding new utility in managing deafferentation pain and identifying good MCS candidates. As the number of potential therapies grow, the clinician's role is shifting to personalizing treatment to the unique pain of each patient. With new treatment modalities, this form of personalized medicine is more possible than ever before.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since the early 1990s, motor cortex stimulation (MCS) has been a unique treatment modality for patients with drug-resistant deafferentation pain. While underpowered studies and case reports have limited definitive, data-driven analysis of MCS in the past, recent research has brought new clarity to the MCS literature and has helped identify appropriate indications for MCS and its long-term efficacy. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review, new research in MCS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are analyzed and compared with historical landmark papers. Currently, MCS is effective in providing relief to 40-64% of patients, with decreasing analgesic effect over time addressed by altering stimulation settings. rTMS and tDCS, two historic, non-invasive stimulation techniques, are providing new alternatives for the treatment of deafferentation pain, with rTMS finding utility in identifying MCS responders. Future advances in electrode arrays, neuro-navigation, and high-definition tDCS hold promise in providing pain relief to growing numbers of patients. Deafferentation pain is severe, disabling, and remains a challenge for patients and providers alike. Over the last several years, the MCS literature has been revitalized with studies and meta-analyses demonstrating MCS effectiveness and providing guidance in identifying responders. At the same time, rTMS and tDCS, two time-honored non-invasive stimulation techniques, are finding new utility in managing deafferentation pain and identifying good MCS candidates. As the number of potential therapies grow, the clinician's role is shifting to personalizing treatment to the unique pain of each patient. With new treatment modalities, this form of personalized medicine is more possible than ever before.
Entities:
Keywords:
Motor cortex stimulation; Neuromodulation; Neuropathic pain; Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Trigeminal neuralgia
Authors: Benoit Pirotte; Philippe Voordecker; Carine Neugroschl; Danielle Baleriaux; David Wikler; Thierry Metens; Vincent Denolin; Alfred Joffroy; Nicolas Massager; Jacques Brotchi; Marc Levivier Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: L García-Larrea; R Peyron; P Mertens; M C Gregoire; F Lavenne; D Le Bars; P Convers; F Mauguière; M Sindou; B Laurent Journal: Pain Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Li Jiang; Yadong Ji; Pamela J Voulalas; Michael Keaser; Su Xu; Rao P Gullapalli; Joel Greenspan; Radi Masri Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2013-12-27 Impact factor: 8.955