ABSTRACT
Pilot trials have suggested that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) may reduce limb spasticity in multiple sclerosis (MS). We carried out the current meta-analysis to synthesize currently available evidence regarding such correlation. Up to November 2022, five international electronic databases (Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL) and four Chinese electronic databases (CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP) were systematically searched to identify randomized trials comparing active rTMS and sham stimulation in patients with MS-related spasticity. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data on study design, quality, clinical outcomes, and time points measured. The primary outcome was clinical spasticity relief after intervention. Secondary outcomes included spasticity at the follow-up visit 2 weeks later and post-treatment fatigue. Of 831 titles found, we included 8 studies (181 participants) in the quantitative analysis. Pooled analyses showed that rTMS therapy was associated with significant spasticity relief in the early post-intervention period [standardized mean differences (SMD): -0.67; 95%CI: -1.12 to -0.21], but there was insufficient evidence for rTMS in reducing spasticity at the follow-up visit 2 weeks later (SMD: -0.17; 95%CI: -0.52 to 0.17) and fatigue (SMD: -0.26; 95%CI: -0.84 to 0.31). This evidence supports the recommendations to treat MS-related spasticity with rTMS, but underlines the need for further large randomized trials.
Subject(s)
Multiple Sclerosis , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation , Humans , Multiple Sclerosis/complications , Multiple Sclerosis/therapyABSTRACT
Pilot trials have suggested that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) may reduce limb spasticity in multiple sclerosis (MS). We carried out the current meta-analysis to synthesize currently available evidence regarding such correlation. Up to November 2022, five international electronic databases (Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL) and four Chinese electronic databases (CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP) were systematically searched to identify randomized trials comparing active rTMS and sham stimulation in patients with MS-related spasticity. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data on study design, quality, clinical outcomes, and time points measured. The primary outcome was clinical spasticity relief after intervention. Secondary outcomes included spasticity at the follow-up visit 2 weeks later and post-treatment fatigue. Of 831 titles found, we included 8 studies (181 participants) in the quantitative analysis. Pooled analyses showed that rTMS therapy was associated with significant spasticity relief in the early post-intervention period [standardized mean differences (SMD): -0.67; 95%CI: -1.12 to -0.21], but there was insufficient evidence for rTMS in reducing spasticity at the follow-up visit 2 weeks later (SMD: -0.17; 95%CI: -0.52 to 0.17) and fatigue (SMD: -0.26; 95%CI: -0.84 to 0.31). This evidence supports the recommendations to treat MS-related spasticity with rTMS, but underlines the need for further large randomized trials.