Efficacy of deep rTMS for neuropathic pain in the lower limb: a randomized, double-blind crossover trial of an H-coil and figure-8 coil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Electrical motor cortex stimulation can relieve neuropathic pain (NP), but its use requires patients to undergo an invasive procedure. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) using a figure-8 coil can relieve NP noninvasively, but its ability to relieve lower limb pain is still limited. Deep rTMS using an H-coil can effectively stimulate deep brain regions and has been widely used for the treatment of various neurological diseases; however, there have been no clinical studies comparing the effectiveness of figure-8 coils and H-coils. This study assessed the clinical effectiveness of 5 once-daily stimulations with H-coils and figure-8 coils in patients with NP. METHODS This randomized, double-blind, 3-way crossover trial examined 18 patients with NP who sequentially received 3 types of stimulations in the M1 for 5 consecutive days; each 5-day stimulation period was followed by a 17-day follow-up period before crossing over to the next type of stimulation. During each rTMS session, patients received a 5-Hz rTMS to the M1 region corresponding to the painful lower limb. The visual analog scale (VAS) and the Japanese version of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire 2 (SF-MPQ2-J) were used to measure pain intensity. The primary outcome was VAS score reduction immediately after and 1 hour after intervention. RESULTS Both the VAS and SF-MPQ2-J showed significant pain improvement immediately after deep rTMS with an H-coil as compared with the sham group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.049, respectively). However, neither outcome measure showed significant pain improvement when using a figure-8 coil. The VAS also showed significant pain improvement 1 hour after deep rTMS with an H-coil (p = 0.004) but not 1 hour after rTMS using a figure-8 coil. None of the patients exhibited any serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS The current findings suggest that the use of deep rTMS with an H-coil in the lower limb region of the M1 in patients with NP was tolerable and could provide significant short-term pain relief. Clinical trial registration no.: UMIN000010536 ( http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/ ).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".