Trial reportPloS one2025
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation targeted with MRI based neuro-navigation in major depressive episode: a double-blind, multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01677078 (Assessment of the Neuronavigation System Coupled With Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. A Randomized Double Blind Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Assessment of the Neuronavigation System Coupled With Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. A Randomized Double Blind Study
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beam-F3 error analysis and validation of Neurally-F3 equations using realistic head models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Neuronavigation for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Mood Disorders: Technical Foundation, Advances, and Emerging Tools.Human brain mapping · 2025Review
- A study on the clinical efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with transcranial direct current stimulation in adolescent depression.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextHigh-frequency (HF) transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is widely used in Major Depressive Episode (MDE). Optimization of its efficacy with a neuro-navigation system has been proposed based on a small randomized controlled trial (RCT) supporting a large effect.
methodThis evaluator- and patient-blind, multicenter RCT assessed the superiority in terms of efficacy of 10 HF rTMS sessions of the left DLPFC targeted with MRI based neuro-navigation versus similar sessions targeted by the standard 5 cm technique. The study was conducted between January 2013 and April 2017, at 4 hospitals centers in France where both in- and out- patients with MDE were included. Randomization was computer-generated (1:1), with allocation concealment implemented within the e-CRF. The main outcome measure was the percentage of responders 44 days (D44) after the rTMS session. Secondary outcomes were percentage of remitters, Beck Depression Inventory and psychomotor retardation assessed with Salpêtrière retardation rating scale (SRRS) for depression at D14 and D44. The results are presented along with their 95% confidence intervals.
results105 patients were randomized and 92 were evaluable with respectively 45 patients in the neuronavigation group and 47 in the standard group. A treatment response was observed for 14 (31.8%) of 44 patients analyzed in the intervention group, and for 16 (35.6%) of 45 patients analyzed in the control group with no statistical difference (relative risk 0.89; 95% confidence interval, [0.50;1.61]). No difference was evidenced for secondary outcomes at D44 whether it concerns remission at D44 (relative risk, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.88), or BDI results (difference in means, 0,01; 95% CI, -3.06 to 3.26), or SRRS results (difference in means, 0.11; 95% CI, -2.42 to 5.02). Similar results were observed at D14. Rates of adverse events were similar in both groups with 23 (47.9%) and 1 (2.1%) of adverse events and serious adverse events in the neuro-navigation group versus 20 (40.8%) and 0 (0%) in the standard group. DISCUSSION: This study failed to reproduce previous findings supporting the use of neuro-navigation system to optimize rTMS efficacy. Limitations of this study includes a small sample size and a number of rTMS sessions that may appear substandard in 2025.
trial registrationNCT01677078.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.