Does deep TMS really works for smoking cessation? A prospective, double blind, randomized, sham controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: A substantial proportion of smokers wishing to quit do not stop smoking when using current therapies to aid cessation. Magnetic pulses to specific brain areas designated as transcranial magnetic stimulation may modulate brain activity and thereby change chemical dependencies. Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) with the H4 coil stimulates neuronal pathways in the lateral prefrontal cortex and insula bilaterally, areas involved in tobacco addiction. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dTMS with T4 coil in smoking cessation. METHODS: In a double blind, controlled clinical trial, adult smokers of at least 10 cigarettes/day were randomized to active (n = 50) versus sham dTMS (n = 50). The protocol involved up to 21 sessions administered over up to 12 weeks. Tobacco use was monitored by self-report and confirmed by expired air monoximetry (at each dTMS visit) and blood cotinine (at the screening visit and at the end of sessions). Participants completed abstinence, mood and cognition scales at determined timepoints during follow-up. RESULTS: In the intention to-treat-analysis, the cessation rate of the intervention and control groups was 14.0%. The reported side effects were as expected for this procedure. Although there were no serious adverse events, three participants were withdrawn according to safety criteria. CONCLUSION: Active treatment with dTMS H4 coil was safe but not effective for smoking cessation.

Treatment of Bipolar Depression with Deep TMS: Results from a Double-Blind, Randomized, Parallel Group, Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial.

Bipolar depression (BD) is a highly prevalent condition with limited therapeutic options. Deep (H1-coil) transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) is a novel TMS modality with established efficacy for unipolar depression. We conducted a randomized sham-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dTMS in treatment-resistant BD patients. Patients received 20 sessions of active or sham dTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (H1-coil, 55 18 Hz 2 s 120% MT trains). The primary outcome was changes in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) from baseline to endpoint (week 4). Secondary outcomes were changes from baseline to the end of the follow-up phase (week 8), and response and remission rates. Safety was assessed using a dTMS adverse effects questionnaire and the Young Mania Rating Scale to assess treatment-emergent mania switch (TEMS). Out of 50 patients, 43 finished the trial. There were 2 and 5 dropouts in the sham and active groups, respectively. Active dTMS was superior to sham at end point (difference favoring dTMS=4.88; 95% CI 0.43 to 9.32, p=0.03) but not at follow-up. There was also a trend for greater response rates in the active (48%) vs sham (24%) groups (OR=2.92; 95% CI=0.87 to 9.78, p=0.08). Remission rates were not statistically different. No TEMS episodes were observed. Deep TMS is a potentially effective and well-tolerated add-on therapy in resistant bipolar depressed patients receiving adequate pharmacotherapy.