Frontiers in Neuroscience (Jun 2024)

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in central post-stroke pain: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

  • Ying Liu,
  • Runqing Miao,
  • Hui Zou,
  • Qian Hu,
  • Shao Yin,
  • Fengya Zhu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2024.1367649
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 18

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundThe rehabilitation of central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a complex clinical challenge, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been widely applied in the research of neurofunctional recovery following stroke. However, there is currently no reliable evidence-based medicine supporting the efficacy of rTMS in central post-stroke pain. This review aims to evaluate the effects of rTMS on central post-stroke pain.MethodsFollowing the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan Fang Data Knowledge Service Platform. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of rTMS in treating central post-stroke pain, and conducted screening based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Characteristics of the included RCTs were extracted. The heterogeneity of the trials was assessed using the I2 statistic. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 17 software. Bias risk and methodological quality were evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the Pedro scale.ResultsA total of six randomized controlled trials involving 288 patients met our inclusion criteria. In our analysis, rTMS was more effective in treating patients with CPSP compared to the placebo group (SMD=-1.15, 95% CI: −1.69, −0.61, P < 0.001). Furthermore, results from subgroup analysis indicated no statistically significant difference in the improvement of pain for durations exceeding 6 months when comparing rTMS to conventional treatment (SMD=-0.80, 95% CI: −1.63, 0.03, P = 0.059).ConclusionTMS can alleviate pain in CPSP patients and improve their motor function, but its effects on depression, anxiety, and MEP-latency are not significant.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD42024497530.

Keywords