Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35295503›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2021

Case Report: Initial Evidence of Safety and Efficacy of High Definition-Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in a Patient With Neuropathic Pain and Implanted Spinal Cord Stimulator.

Choi Deblieck, Steven Smeijers, Bart Morlion, Abhishek Datta, Chris Thomas, Tom Theys

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 53% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Better Fields or Currents? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Transcranial Magnetic (rTMS) Versus Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for Neuropathic Pain.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023
    Trial
  2. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Choi DeblieckAcademic Center for Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) and Neuromodulation, University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Steven SmeijersDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Bart MorlionDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, Section Anaesthesiology & Algology, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Abhishek DattaResearch and Development, Soterix Medical Inc., Woodbridge, NJ, United States.
Chris ThomasResearch and Development, Soterix Medical Inc., Woodbridge, NJ, United States.
Tom TheysDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BECity College of New York · USSoterix Medical (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuropathic pain (NP), often treatment-refractory, is one of the most debilitating conditions contributing to suffering and disability worldwide. Recently, non-invasive neuromodulation techniques, particularly repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have emerged as potential therapeutic alternatives due to their ability to alter cortical excitability of neural circuits. However, the magnetic field induced in rTMS may be unsafe for patients with an implanted electrode in the head or neck area while tDCS poses no theoretical risk of injury to these patients. High definition (HD)-tDCS is a novel, more focal technique of tDCS and may be safer to the patient compared to the more diffuse stimulation of conventional tDCS. To our knowledge, no study has ever demonstrated the safety and/or feasibility of HD-tDCS in patients with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices using computational modeling of induced electrical fields. Furthermore, this study highlights the potential use of (HD-)tDCS as predictive tool for a positive response in chronic epidural motor cortex stimulation (MCS), especially in patients with an implanted device not suitable for rTMS. In a 54-year-old woman with an implanted spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system for another pain syndrome, HD-tDCS was initiated for refractory post-surgical inferior alveolar nerve neuropathy. She was submitted to 7 days of anodal HD-tDCS over the left motor cortex at 1.5 mA for 30 min. A notable decrease in pain perception was observed, lasting for approximately 5-6 h (Numeric Rating Score decreased from 8 to 4.34). No adverse events were reported. The stimulation parameters and clinical efficacy of the SCS system remained unchanged. Additionally, computational analysis indicated no meaningful alteration of current flow when considering a model with a SCS implant with respect to a model without implant. Regarding the positive therapeutic effect of HD-tDCS, the patient was selected for an epidural MCS trial and subsequent implantation, which showed short-term pain relief of 50-75%. Although one case does not demonstrate efficacy, tolerability, or safety to the novel intervention, it paves the way for better diagnosis and treatment for patients who are otherwise excluded from other non-invasive neuromodulation techniques, such as rTMS. A positive tDCS effect could be a potential biomarker for positive epidural MCS response in patients with an implanted stimulation device non-compatible with rTMS.

Indexed as

complex regional pain syndromehigh definition transcranial direct current stimulationmodelingneuropathic painnon-invasive electrical stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35295503
PMCPMC8915614
OpenAlexW3214953338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.