Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22759345›Full record

SynthesisNeuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society2012

Analgesic effects of noninvasive brain stimulation in rodent animal models: a systematic review of translational findings.

Magdalena Sarah Volz, Theresa Sophie Volz, Andre Russowsky Brunoni, João Paulo Vaz Tostes Ribeiro de Oliveira, Felipe Fregni

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Magdalena Sarah VolzLaboratory of Neuromodulation, Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Theresa Sophie Volz
Andre Russowsky Brunoni
João Paulo Vaz Tostes Ribeiro de Oliveira
Felipe Fregni
Harvard University · USCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEHospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo · BRMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

ZINC STATUS AND T CELL DISORDER IN MILD HUMAN ZINC DEFICIENCYM01RR001032 · NCRR · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI MANTZOROS, CHRISTOS S · 1985 to 2008
$32.3M
Investigation and treatment of central nervous system dysfunction in chronic pelvR21DK081773 · NIDDK · SPAULDING REHABILITATION HOSPITAL · PI FREGNI, FELIPE · 2009 to 2010
$475k
NCRR NIH HHS M01 RR001032NIDDK NIH HHS 5R21DK081773-03NIDDK NIH HHS R21 DK081773
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesNoninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) interventions have demonstrated promising results in the clinical treatment of pain, according to several preliminary trials, although the results have been mixed. The limitations of clinical research on NIBS are the insufficient understanding of its mechanisms of action, a lack of adequate safety data, and several disparities with regard to stimulation parameters, which have hindered the generalizability of such studies. Thus, experimental animal research that allows the use of more invasive interventions and creates additional control of independent variables and confounders is desirable. To this end, we systematically reviewed animal studies investigating the analgesic effects of NIBS. In addition, we also explored the investigation of NIBS in animal models of stroke as to compare these findings with NIBS animal pain research.

methodsOf 1916 articles that were found initially, we identified 15 studies (stroke and pain studies) per our eligibility criteria that used NIBS methods, such as transcranial direct current stimulation, paired associative stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcranial electrostimulation. We extracted the main outcomes on stroke and pain, as well as the methods and electrical parameters of each technique.

resultsNIBS techniques are effective in alleviating pain. Similar beneficial clinical effects are observed in stroke. The main insights from these animal studies are the following: 1) combination of NIBS with analgesic drugs has a synergistic effect; 2) effects are dependent on the parameters of stimulation, and in fact, not necessarily the strongest stimulation parameter (i.e., the largest intensity of stimulation) is associated with the largest benefit; 3) pain studies show an overall good quality as indexed by Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments guidelines of the reporting of animal experiments, but insufficient with regard to the reporting of safety data for brain stimulation; 4) these studies suggest that NIBS techniques have a primary effect on synaptic plasticity, but they also suggest other mechanisms of action such as via neurovascular modulation.

conclusionsWe found a limited number of animal studies for both pain and stroke NIBS experimental research. There is a lack of safety data in animal studies in these two topics and results from these studies have not been yet fully tested and translated to human research. We discuss the challenges and limitations of translating experimental animal research on NIBS into clinical studies.

Indexed as

Electric Stimulation TherapyAnalgesiaAnimalsBrainDisease Models, AnimalHumansMaleMiceNeuronal PlasticityPainPain ManagementPain MeasurementRatsStrokeTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTranslational Research, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID22759345
PMCPMC4018630
OpenAlexW2124280537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.