Title Participants Abstract "Neurostimulation in People with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials-Part II: Brain Neurostimulation" "Shaheen Hamdy" "Objective. To assess the effects of brain neurostimulation (i.e., repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [rTMS] and transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]) in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD). Methods. Systematic literature searches were conducted in four electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed) to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. Using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2), the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated, after which meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model. Results. In total, 24 studies reporting on brain neurostimulation were included: 11 studies on rTMS, 9 studies on tDCS, and 4 studies on combined neurostimulation interventions. Overall, within-group meta-analysis and between-group analysis for rTMS identified significant large and small effects in favour of stimulation, respectively. For tDCS, overall within-group analysis and between-group analysis identified significant large and moderate effects in favour of stimulation, respectively. Conclusion. Both rTMS and tDCS show promising effects in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. However, comparisons between studies were challenging due to high heterogeneity in stimulation protocols and experimental parameters, potential moderators, and inconsistent methodological reporting. Generalisations of meta-analyses need to be interpreted with care. Future research should include large RCTs using standard protocols and reporting guidelines as achieved by international consensus." "Responsive neurostimulation in epilepsy" "Sofie Carrette, Mathieu Sprengers" "Neurostimulation approaches to primary headache disorders" "Thornston Bartsch, Koen Paemeleire, Peter Goadsby" "Purpose of review: Conventional management options in medically intractable chronic-headache syndromes, such as chronic migraine, chronic cluster headache and hemicrania continua, are often limited. This review summarizes the current concepts, approaches and outcome data of invasive device-based neurostimulation approaches using occipital-nerve stimulation and deep-brain stimulation. Recent findings: Recently, there has been considerable progress in neurostimulation approaches to medically intractable chronic-headache syndromes. Previous studies have analysed the safety and efficacy of suboccipital neurostimulation in drug-resistant chronic-headache syndromes such as in chronic migraine, chronic cluster headache and hemicrania continua. The studies suggest suboccipital neurostimulation can have an effect even decades after onset of headaches, thus representing a possible therapeutic option in patients that do not respond to any medication. Similarly, to date over 50 patients with cluster headaches underwent hypothalamic deep-brain stimulation. From these, an average of 50-70% did show a significant positive response. Summary: These findings will help to further elucidate the clinical potential of neurostimulation in chronic headache." "Neurostimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy : a systematic review of clinical evidence for efficacy, safety, contraindications and predictors for response" "Paul Boon, Elien De Cock, Ann Mertens, Eugen Trinka" "Purpose of review: Neurostimulation is becoming an increasingly accepted treatment alternative for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) who are unsuitable surgery candidates. Standardized guidelines on when or how to use the various neurostimulation modalities are lacking. We conducted a systematic review on the currently available neurostimulation modalities primarily with regard to effectiveness and safety. Recent findings: For vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), there is moderate-quality evidence for its effectiveness in adults with drug-resistant partial epilepsies. Moderate-to-low-quality evidence supports the efficacy and safety of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) in patients with DRE. There is moderate-to-very low-quality evidence that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is effective or well tolerated. For transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and trigeminal nerve stimulation (TNS), there are insufficient data to support the efficacy of any of these modalities for DRE. These treatment modalities, nevertheless, appear well tolerated, with no severe adverse events reported. Summary: Head-to-head comparison of treatment modalities such as VNS, DBS and RNS across different epileptic syndromes are required to decide which treatment modality is the most effective for a given patient scenario. Such studies are challenging and it is unlikely that data will be available in the near future. Additional data collection on potentially promising noninvasive neurostimulation modalities like tVNS, TMS, TNS and tDCS is warranted to get a more precise estimate of their therapeutic benefit and long-term safety." "Auto-Targeted Neurostimulation In Chronic Low Back Pain" "Jo Nijs, Maria Encarnación Aguilar Ferrándiz, Yori Gidron, Dries Van Dyck" "No abstract available" "Auto-Targeted Neurostimulation Is Not Superior to Placebo in Chronic Low Back Pain" "Maria Encarnación Aguilar Ferrándiz, Jo Nijs, Yori Gidron" "BACKGROUND: Myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) are common in people with musculoskeletal pain and may play a role in chronic nonspecific low back pain (CLBP). One of the potential treatments of MTrPs is the Nervomatrix Soleve® auto-targeted neurostimulation device, providing targeted transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to MTrPs in the lower back muscles. To date, no controlled studies have evaluated the effectiveness of this device for the pain management of this population.OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the Nervomatrix Soleve® auto-targeted neurostimulation device is superior over placebo for the treatment of CLBP.STUDY DESIGN: A fourfold-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted.SETTING: Brussels University Hospital, health care centers and pharmacies around Belgium.METHODS: Participants with CLBP for at least 3 months were randomly assigned to the experimental (the Nervomatrix Soleve® auto-targeted neurostimulation device providing TENS-stimulation and mechanical pressure) or placebo group (the Nervomatrix Soleve® auto-targeted neurostimulation device providing mechanical pressure alone without current). The treatment protocol in both groups consisted of 6 treatment sessions per patient. Participants were evaluated at baseline prior to the intervention, immediately following treatment, and at one month follow-up. Pain and pain behavior (steps climbed) were assessed as primary outcome measures. Secondary outcome measures were pain functioning, health beliefs, symptoms of central sensitization, pain catastrophizing, and kinesiophobia.RESULTS: In total, 39 participants were included in the study. Participants in both groups improved significantly for pain and functioning, but no significant differences were observed between groups. These improvements were not clinically meaningful for any of the reported measures. The health beliefs changed significantly in both groups (P < 0.05), with superior results at follow-up in the placebo group.LIMITATIONS: The follow-up period is limited to one month.CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of MTrPs with the Nervomatrix Soleve® auto-targeted neurostimulation device in patients with CLBP does not result in a better outcome than placebo-treatment in terms of pain, pain behavior, functioning, central sensitization, pain catastrophizing, and health beliefs." "Technical aspects of neurostimulation : focus on equipment, electric field modeling, and stimulation protocols" "Deborah Klooster, Anton JA de Louw, Albert Aldenkamp, René Besseling, Rob MC Mestrom, Sofie Carrette, S Zinger, Jan WM Bergmans, WH Mess, Evelien Carrette, Lisanne EM Breuer, A Bernas, AG Tijhuis" "Does a single neurostimulation session really affect mood in healthy individuals?" "Jonathan Remue, Chris Baeken, Rudi De Raedt" "Non-invasive neurostimulation or neuromodulation techniques such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) were welcomed as promising tools for investigating cognitive and mood processes in healthy participants as well as in patients suffering from neuropsychiatric conditions. Due to their rather easy application, both modalities have been used to experimentally examine prefrontal cognitive and emotional control. However, it remains unclear whether a single session of such stimulation may affect the mood of participants in a healthy state. We provide a systematic review of studies reporting the effects of a single session of rTMS or tDCS (…-2014) on self-reported mood in healthy participants. Although early studies reported significant effects on self-reported mood in healthy participants, more recent work investigating mood effects after a single rTMS/tDCS session has failed to find any significant changes in self-reported mood. Therefore it appears that a single session of rTMS/tDCS has no impact on mood in the healthy state." "Neurostimulation as an intervention for treatment resistant depression" "Rudi De Raedt, Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt, Chris Baeken" "Despite the fact that several interventions for major depression have proven efficacy, a substantial number of patients are or become treatment resistant to various forms of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy. Biological interventions that directly target brain activity such as electroconvulsive therapy are used to treat these patients, but some of these interventions are unlikely to be easily accepted because of their more invasive nature or side-effects. The efficacy of non-invasive neurostimulation with a favorable side effect profile, such as repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, could not be sufficiently demonstrated for treatment resistant depressed patients (TRD). We argue that research on the working mechanisms of these neurostimulation techniques is necessary to develop more efficient treatment protocols. After an overview of current neurostimulation approaches to treatment resistance and the introduction of a neurobiological and a cognitive framework of depression, we provide an integrative review of research on both the neurobiological and cognitive working mechanisms of neurostimulation in TRD, with a specific emphasis on the work of our lab. Thereafter, we describe our own studies and studies from other labs on new neurocognitive interventions. Finally we discuss how all this knowledge can be used to further develop new strategies to deal with treatment resistance, in combining neurostimulation and cognitive interventions." "[Brain stimulation: the most direct form of neurostimulation]." "Pascal Sienaert" "BACKGROUND: Brain stimulation is the most direct form of neuromodulation. Direct brain stimulation is an older procedure that has taken various forms, but 'non-invasive brain stimulation' is a more recent development. AIM: To provide an overview of the current arsenal of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques. METHOD: We discuss the underlying principles, the pros and cons, and the applicability of non-invasive brain stimulation in experimental research and treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders. RESULTS: Non-invasive brain stimulation is a direct form of neuromodulation, which is not invasive, harmful or painful. Its effects are in principle temporary, which makes the technique suitable for experimental research. At the same time, temporary effects can have lasting clinical consequences, if they target neuroplasticity to aid rehabilitation or alleviate symptoms. CONCLUSION: Whereas the value of non-invasive brain stimulation for research purposes is undisputed, its efficacy and value as a treatment for neuropsychiatric disorders are still being debated. Nevertheless, the accumulated evidence about the clinical efficacy of the treatment for certain disorders is sufficiently compelling to start thinking about European regulations and standard medical insurance coverage."