A preliminary study on the effect of transcranial magnetic stimulation on refractory migraine and brain network mechanism
10.3760/cma.j.cn113694-20241215-00802
- VernacularTitle:经颅磁刺激对难治性偏头痛的疗效及其脑网络机制初步探讨
- Author:
Xiyue FAN
1
;
Jingya DENG
1
;
Xiaoming WANG
1
;
Dan YANG
1
;
Chen GOU
1
;
Tingting PENG
1
;
Shuangfeng YANG
1
Author Information
1. 川北医学院附属医院神经内科，南充637000
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Migraine disorders;
Magnetic resonance imaging;
Transcranial magnetic stimulation;
Therapies, investigational
- From:
Chinese Journal of Neurology
2025;58(4):372-379
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore the clinical efficacy, safety and possible neuroimaging mechanism of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of refractory migraine.Methods:Thirty patients with refractory migraine were selected from the Department of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College from October 2022 to August 2023. The patients were randomly divided into dTMS group ( n=10), rTMS group ( n=10) and sham stimulation group ( n=10). The dTMS group was treated with H7 coil and the rTMS group with "8" coil, and the sham stimulation group was treated with sham stimulation rTMS with the frequency of 10 Hz. The stimulation site was the contralateral primary motor cortex (M1) of headache, which was treated for 2 weeks (3 600 pulses per time, 5 times per week, 10 times in total). Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) evaluations were performed before treatment, on the first day after treatment, and 1, 3 and 6 months after treatment. The resting-state functional magnetic resonance images of the 3 groups of patients before and after treatment were collected and analyzed by MATLAB2018b, SPM12 and RESTPLUS softwares, and the brain regions with different regional homogeneity (ReHo) before and after treatment were obtained. The general clinical data and scale scoring data were analyzed and processed by SPSS 26.0 version software. Results:There were significant differences in VAS scores among the dTMS group (before treatment 6.70±0.68, the first day after treatment 5.60±0.70, 1 month after treatment 5.00±0.82, 3 months after treatment 3.50±0.85, 6 months after treatment 3.90±1.45), the rTMS group (before treatment 6.90±0.74, the first day after treatment 5.90±0.74, 1 month after treatment 5.30±0.82, 3 months after treatment 5.30±0.82, 6 months after treatment 6.80±0.63) and the sham stimulation group (before treatment 6.60±0.97, the first day after treatment 6.70±0.95, 1 month after treatment 6.90±1.10, 3 months after treatment 6.70±0.68, 6 months after treatment 7.10±0.88; F=16.054, P<0.001), VAS scores among different time points ( F=34.292, P<0.001), and the interaction between groups and time ( F=24.136, P<0.001). Compared with those before treatment, VAS scores in the dTMS group and the rTMS group decreased on the first day after treatment, 1 month and 3 months after treatment (all P<0.05); VAS scores decreased in the dTMS group 6 months after treatment ( P<0.05). Compared with the sham stimulation group, the VAS scores of the dTMS group were lower at the same time points after treatment (all P<0.05), and the VAS scores of the rTMS group were lower on the first day after treatment, 1 month and 3 months after treatment (all P<0.05). Compared with the rTMS group, VAS scores were lower at 3 and 6 months after dTMS treatment (both P<0.05). There were significant differences in HIT-6 scores among groups ( F=13.173, P<0.001), HIT-6 scores among different time points ( F=60.788, P<0.001), and interaction between groups and time ( F=35.576, P<0.001). Compared with those before treatment, the HIT-6 scores in the dTMS group decreased on the first day after treatment ( P<0.05); the HIT-6 scores in the dTMS group and the rTMS group decreased 1 month and 3 months after treatment (both P<0.05); the HIT-6 scores decreased in the dTMS group 6 months after treatment ( P<0.05). Compared with the sham stimulation group, the HIT-6 scores were lower in the dTMS group at the same time points after treatment (all P<0.05), and the HIT-6 scores were lower in the rTMS group at 1 and 3 months after treatment (both P<0.05). Compared with the rTMS group, HIT-6 scores were lower at 3 and 6 months after dTMS treatment (both P<0.05). Analysis of ReHo results: compared with those before treatment, the ReHo values of the right cerebellar angle area 1 increased in the dTMS group and the sham stimulation group, decreased in the rTMS group. The ReHo values of the right middle occipital gyrus, left dorsolateral superior frontal gyrus and right cerebellar area 8 increased in the dTMS group, but decreased in the rTMS group and the sham stimulation group. The ReHo values of the left precentral gyrus and left superior temporal gyrus decreased in the dTMS group, while those in the rTMS group and the sham stimulation group increased. There were no obvious adverse reactions in the 3 groups during the treatment and follow-up period. Conclusions:dTMS and rTMS may help to improve the headache degree and quality of life of patients with refractory migraine, and they are safe, which may be related to the changes of brain network in the right cerebellar angle area 1, right middle occipital gyrus, left dorsolateral superior frontal gyrus, left precentral gyrus, left superior temporal gyrus and right cerebellar area 8.
