scholarly journals Which is the best transcranial direct current stimulation protocol for migraine prevention? A systematic review and critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaele Ornello ◽  
Valeria Caponnetto ◽  
Susanna Ratti ◽  
Giulia D’Aurizio ◽  
Chiara Rosignoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Migraine Prevention ◽  
Anodal Tdcs ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Study Results

Abstract Background Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could counteract the pathophysiological triggers of migraine attacks by modulating cortical excitability. Several pilot randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the efficacy of tDCS for migraine prevention. We reviewed and summarized the state of the art of tDCS protocols for migraine prevention, discussing study results according to the stimulations parameters and patients’ populations. Main body We combined the keywords ‘migraine’, ‘headache’, ‘transcranial direct current stimulation’, and ‘tDCS’ and searched Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science, from the beginning of indexing to June 22, 2021. We only included RCTs comparing the efficacy of active tDCS with sham tDCS to decrease migraine frequency, intensity, and/or acute drug utilization. The risk of bias of each RCT was assessed by using the RoB-2 tool (Cochrane Collaboration). Thirteen RCTs (from 2011 to 2021) were included in the review. The included patients ranged from 13 to 135. RCTs included patients with any migraine (n=3), chronic migraine (n=6), episodic migraine (n=3) or menstrual migraine (n=1). Six RCTs used cathodal and five anodal tDCS, while two RCTs compared the efficacy of both cathodal and anodal tDCS with that of sham. In most of the cathodal stimulation trials, the target areas were the occipital regions, with reference on central or supraorbital areas. In anodal RCTs, the anode was usually placed above the motor cortical areas and the cathode on supraorbital areas. All RCTs adopted repeated sessions (from 5 to 28) at variable intervals, while the follow-up length spanned from 1 day up to 12 months. Efficacy results were variable but overall positive. According to the RoB-2 tool, only four of the 13 RCTs had a low risk of bias, while the others presented some concerns. Conclusions Both anodal and cathodal tDCS are promising for migraine prevention. However, there is a need for larger and rigorous RCTs and standardized procedures. Additionally, the potential benefits and targeted neurostimulation protocols should be assessed for specific subgroups of patients.

Transcranial direct current stimulation in the treatment of major depression: a meta-analysis

2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (9) ◽  
pp. 1791-1800 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. G. Kalu ◽  
C. E. Sexton ◽  
C. K. Loo ◽  
K. P. Ebmeier
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Treatment Of Depression ◽  
Meta Regression

BackgroundSo far, no comprehensive answer has emerged to the question of whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can make a clinically useful contribution to the treatment of major depression. We aim to present a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS in the treatment of depression.MethodMedline and Embase were searched for open-label and randomized controlled trials of tDCS in depression using the expressions (‘transcranial direct current stimulation’ or ‘tDCS’) and (‘depression’ or ‘depressed’). Study data were extracted with a standardized data sheet. For randomized controlled trials, effect size (Hedges' g) was calculated and the relationships between study variables and effect size explored using meta-regression.ResultsA total of 108 citations were screened and 10 studies included in the systematic review. Six randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis, with a cumulative sample of 96 active and 80 sham tDCS courses. Active tDCS was found to be more effective than sham tDCS for the reduction of depression severity (Hedges' g=0.743, 95% confidence interval 0.21–1.27), although study results differed more than expected by chance (Q=15.52, df=6, p=0.017, I2=61.35). Meta-regression did not reveal any significant correlations.ConclusionsOur study was limited by the small number of studies included, which often had small sample size. Future studies should use larger, if possible representative, health service patient samples, and optimized protocols to evaluate the efficacy of tDCS in the treatment of depression further.

scholarly journals The Efficacy of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Enhancing Surgical Skill Acquisition: A Preliminary Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 707
Author(s):  
Chao-Ming Hung ◽  
Bing-Yan Zeng ◽  
Bing-Syuan Zeng ◽  
Cheuk-Kwan Sun ◽  
Yu-Shian Cheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Skill Acquisition ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Surgical Skill ◽  
Sham Control ◽  
Surgical Performance ◽  
Randomized Controlled

The application of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to targeted cortices has been found to improve in skill acquisition; however, these beneficial effects remained unclear in fine and complicated skill. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to investigate the association between tDCS application and the efficacy of surgical performance during surgical skill training. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of tDCS in enhancing surgical skill acquisition. This meta-analysis was conducted under a random-effect model. Six RCTs with 198 participants were included. The main result revealed that tDCS was associated with significantly better improvement in surgical performance than the sham control (Hedges’ g = 0.659, 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) = 0.383 to 0.935, p < 0.001). The subgroups of tDCS over the bilateral prefrontal cortex (Hedges’ g = 0.900, 95%CIs = 0.419 to 1.382, p < 0.001) and the primary motor cortex (Hedges’ g = 0.599, 95%CIs = 0.245 to 0.953, p = 0.001) were both associated with significantly better improvements in surgical performance. The tDCS application was not associated with significant differences in error scores or rates of local discomfort compared with a sham control. This meta-analysis supported the rationale for the tDCS application in surgical training programs to improve surgical skill acquisition.

scholarly journals Adjuvant Transarterial Chemoembolization Following Curative-Intent Hepatectomy Versus Hepatectomy Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 2984
Author(s):  
Stepan M. Esagian ◽  
Christos D. Kakos ◽  
Emmanouil Giorgakis ◽  
Lyle Burdine ◽  
J. Camilo Barreto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Transarterial Chemoembolization ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Randomized Controlled

The role of adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing hepatectomy is currently unclear. We performed a systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Random-effects meta-analysis was carried out to compare the overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with resectable HCC undergoing hepatectomy followed by adjuvant TACE vs. hepatectomy alone in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Meta-regression analyses were performed to explore the effect of hepatitis B viral status, microvascular invasion, type of resection (anatomic vs. parenchymal-sparing), and tumor size on the outcomes. Ten eligible RCTs, reporting on 1216 patients in total, were identified. The combination of hepatectomy and adjuvant TACE was associated with superior OS (hazard ratio (HR): 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52 to 0.85; p < 0.001) and RFS (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.88; p < 0.001) compared to hepatectomy alone. There were significant concerns regarding the risk of bias in most of the included studies. Overall, adjuvant TACE may be associated with an oncologic benefit in select HCC patients. However, the applicability of these findings may be limited to Eastern Asian populations, due to the geographically restricted sample. High-quality multinational RCTs, as well as predictive tools to optimize patient selection, are necessary before adjuvant TACE can be routinely implemented into standard practice. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42021245758.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document