Study; na | Substance/ SUDb/ Scale | Study design/ Treatmentc | Coil/ Frequency /Intensity (%MT) | Primary outcomes | Secondary outcomes (acute & at follow-up)e | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Acute (after daily DTMS) | Last follow-up (months since DTMS)d | |||||
Rapinesi et al., 2013 [17]; n = 3 | Alcohol/ AUD/ OCDS | Open-label/ Add-on | H1/ 20 Hz/ 120% | Post-DTMS (20 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (6 months) vs. baseline: | ↓ HDRS |
↓ craving | ↓ craving | |||||
Rapinesi et al., 2014 [19]; n = 1 | Alcohol/ AUD/ OCDS | Open-label/ Add-on | H1/ 18 Hz/ 120% | Post-DTMS (20 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (12 months) vs. baseline: | ↓ HDRS |
↓ craving | ↓ craving; ↑ abstinence | |||||
Ceccanti et al., 2015 [20]f; n = 9 (n = 9 sham) | Alcohol/ AUD/ VAS | RCT/ Monotherapy | H1 (+cue)/ 20 Hz/ 120% (vs. sham) | Post-DTMS vs. sham (10 sessions): | Post-DTMS vs. sham (2–3 months): | – |
↓ craving, daily use/maximum use, blood cortisol (stress hormone), blood prolactin (marker of dopamine activity) | (trend) ↓ craving, daily use/maximum use | |||||
Post-DTMS (10 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (2–3 months) vs. baseline: | |||||
↓ craving, daily use/maximum use, blood cortisol and prolactin | (trend) ↓ craving, maximum use; ↓ daily use | |||||
Girardi et al., 2015 [21]; n = 10 | Alcohol/ AUD/ OCDS | Open-label/ Add-on | H1/ 20 Hz/ 120% | Post-DTMS (20 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (6 months) vs. baseline: | ↓ HDRS |
↓ craving | ↓ craving | |||||
Rapinesi et al., 2015 [22]; n = 11 | Alcohol/ AUD/ OCDS | Open-label/ Add-on | H1/ 18 Hz/ 120% | Post-DTMS (20 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (6 months) vs. baseline: | ↓ HDRS |
↓ craving | ↓ craving | |||||
Addolorato et al., 2017 [25]; n = 5 (n = 6 sham) | Alcohol/ AUD/ OCDS | RCT/ Monotherapy | H/ 10 Hz/ 100% (vs. sham) | Post-DTMS (12 sessions) vs. baseline: | – | – |
↔ craving; ↓ daily use/total use, striatal dopamine transporter (SPECT); ↑ abstinence | ||||||
Post-sham (12 sessions) vs. baseline: | ||||||
↔ all effects (no change from baseline) | ||||||
Dinur-Klein et al., 2014 [18]f; 10 Hz + cue: n = 16 (n = 15 sham); 10 Hz–cue: n = 16 (n = 16 sham); 1 Hz + cue: n = 7; 1 Hz–cue: n = 7 | Nicotine/ no SUD/ sTCQ; FTND | RCT/ Monotherapy | HADD (+ or –cue)/ 10 Hz/ 120%/ vs. 1 Hz/ 120% (vs. sham) | Post-DTMS (10 Hz) vs. sham (13 sessions): | Post-DTMS (10 Hz) vs. sham (6 months): | – |
(trend) ↑ efficacy +cue vs. –cue; ↔ craving; ↓ cigarettes/day, dependence, consumption (urine cotinine); ↑ abstinence (25–44% vs. 0–13% sham), response (50% ↓ in consumption); 1 Hz DTMS discontinued due to poor efficacy | ↓ cigarettes/day; ↑ abstinence (23–33% vs. 0–9% sham) | |||||
Bolloni et al., 2016 [24]; n = 6 (n = 4 sham) | Cocaine/ CUD/ no scale | RCT/ Monotherapy | H1/ 10 Hz/ 100% (vs. sham) | Post-DTMS vs. sham (12 sessions): | Post-DTMS vs. sham (6 months): | – |
↔ consumption (hair cocaine) | ↔ consumption (hair cocaine) | |||||
Post-DTMS (12 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (6Â months) vs. baseline: | |||||
↓ consumption (hair cocaine) | ↓ consumption (hair cocaine) | |||||
Rapinesi et al., 2016 [23]; n = 7 | Cocaine/ CUD/ VAS | Open-label/ Add-on | H1/ 15 Hz/ 100% | Post-DTMS (12 sessions) vs. baseline: | Post-DTMS (2 months) vs. baseline: | – |
↓ craving | ↓ craving |