Affiliation:
1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada
2. Mount Sinai Hospital Toronto Ontario Canada
3. Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba affiliated to the Sackler School of Medicine Tel Aviv Israel
4. Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada
5. Centre for Multimodal Sensorimotor and Pain Research University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada
6. Department of Dentistry Mount Sinai Hospital Toronto Ontario Canada
7. University of Toronto Centre for the Study of Pain University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada
Abstract
AbstractObjectivesTo provide a systematic review of the literature on the effects of peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) in the treatment of chronic peripheral neuropathic pain.MethodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, Web of Science, and ProQuest was conducted from inception to July 2023 to identify studies of any design published in English language that enrolled adult patients (≥18 years) that received PMS for treatment of a chronic peripheral neuropathic pain disorder (pain > 3 months).ResultsTwenty‐three studies were identified which included 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), five case series, two case reports, and one non‐randomized trial. PMS regimens varied across studies and ranged from 5 to 240 min per session over 1 day to 1 year of treatment. Results across included studies were mixed, with some studies suggesting benefits while others showing no significant differences. Of nine placebo‐controlled RCTs, four reported statistically significant findings in favor of PMS use. In the meta‐analysis, PMS significantly reduced pain scores compared to control within 0–1 month of use (mean difference −1.64 on a 0–10 numeric rating scale, 95% confidence interval −2.73 to −0.56, p = 0.003, I2 = 94%, 7 studies [264 participants], very low quality of evidence), but not at the 1–3 months and >3 months of PMS use (very low and low quality of evidence, respectively). Minimal to no adverse effects were reported with PMS use.DiscussionThere is limited and low‐quality evidence to make definitive recommendations on PMS usage, however, the available data is encouraging, especially for short‐term applications of this novel modality. Large high‐quality randomized controlled trials are required to establish definitive efficacy and safety effects of PMS.
Subject
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine