Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT03370107

Comparison of rTMS and H Coil in Neuropathic Pain

rTMS of the motor cortex is an increasingly established analgesic technique for the treatment of neuropathic pain. However its efficacy is generally modest. One reason may be the that conventional rTMS targets only superficial and small cortical regions of the human brain. A newer cooled coil, the Hesed (H) coils, now allows deep and larger surface of stimulation and has been suggested to have analgesic effects in a small pilot trial in diabetic painful polyneuropathy. Based on its deeper mechanism of action and larger surface of stimulation, we hypothesize that this technique will be more effective than rTMS in patients with central pain, a highly unmet medical need. The primary objective of the present study will be to compare the efficacy of H coil, conventional rTMS and sham stimulation of the primary motor cortex in patients central neuropathic pain. Major secondary objectives will be to directly compare the analgesic efficacy of H coil versus conventional rTMS, and compare the efficacy of both techniques in patients with lower limb pain and those with upper limb pain/face. This will be a randomized tricentric sham controlled study

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Department of Pain Management and Research, Oslo University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway

Oslo, 0424, Norway

About this study

This will be a tricenter randomized double blind sham controlled trial with stratified randomization based on the area of pain. Patients will first undergo MRI of the skull to determine the exact position of the coil of the motor cortex for neuronavigation with conventional rTMS. After providing informed consent, they will be randomly assigned to one of 2 treatment groups: active rTMS and Hcoil or sham rTMS and sham Hcoil, according to a 2 : 1 ratio (2 for active, 1 for placebo). For each treatment group (active or sham), the order of sessions will be again randomized according to a crossover design : thus each patient will receive successively either active rTMS followed by active H coil or active H coil followed by active rTMS or two sham stimulations (rTMS and H coil). Each treatment will be applied by an independent investigator not involved in the assessment or selection of patients. The treatment protocol will include 2 periods separated by an interval of 5 to 6 weeks depending on the potential residual analgesic effects to avoid carryover effects (patients whose pain intensity remains minimal after 6 weeks, eg less than 4 /10 on NRS, will not participate in the second crossover period of the study). Each session will consist of 5 consecutive stimulation visits of (active or sham) rTMS and H coil over 5 consecutive days. Each patient will thus receive a total of 10 stimulations (2 series of 5 active rTMS or H coil or 2 series of 5 sham rTMS or H coils) and will have a total of 15 visits, including one screening visit (V1), 10 stimulation visits (V2-V5 and V8-V13), and 4 poststimulation visits 1 and 3 weeks after each treatment period (V6, V7, V14, V15). Conventional magnetic stimulations will be applied with a MacPROX100 machine using neuronavigation system and sessions will consist of 30 series of 10 second pulses with a frequency of 10 Hz and an interval of 20 seconds between each. The stimulation intensity used will be 80 % of the resting motor threshold. Conventional rTMS stimulations will target the primary motor cortex contralateral to the painful area or left side in case of bilateral pain and sham stimulation will be carried out with the opposite face of the coil (biface coil) of identical size, color and shape emitting a sound similar to that emitted by the active coil. H-coil rTMS will be delivered with the Brainsway H-coil (Brainsway, Jerusalem, Israel) applied via a helmet placed on the head corresponding to the primary motor cortex (H10 coil) and connected to a Masgtim Rapid2 stimulatior (Mastim, Whitland, UK), while sham stimulation will be delivered with a sham coil placed in the helmet encasing the active rTMS coil. Active rTMS sessions with H-coil will use exactly the same parameters of stimulation as conventional rTMS, e.g. 30 consecutive trains of stimuli delivered at 10 Hz, at 80 % resting motor threshold (RMT), separated by intertrain intervals of 20 seconds.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age over 18 years and less than 80 years
  • Average pain intensity ≥ 4/10 at screening and randomization
  • Persistent pain for at least 6 months
  • Stable pharmacological treatment for pain
  • Central neuropathic pain as diagnosed by DN4 and NeuPSIG classification algorithm related to stable multiple sclerosis, spinal cord lesion or past stroke

Exclusion criteria

  • Any clinically significant or unstable medical or psychiatric disorder
  • History of substance abuse
  • Litigation
  • Pregnancy/lactation
  • Contraindication to rTMS or Hcoil
  • Intermittent pain, more severe pain than neuropathic pain and diffuse pain

Treatment and study plan

rTMS

Device

Conventional magnetic stimulations will be applied with a MacPROX100 machine using neuronavigation system. H-coil rTMS will be delivered with the Brainsway H-coil (Brainsway, Jerusalem, Israel) applied via a helmet placed on the head corresponding to the primary motor cortex (H10 coil) and connected to a Masgtim Rapid2 stimulatior (Mastim, Whitland, UK), while sham stimulation will be delivered with a sham coil placed in the helmet encasing the active rTMS coil. Active rTMS sessions with H-coil will use exactly the same parameters of stimulation as conventional rTMS.

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in the self reported average pain intensity (NRS from 0 to 10) over the past 24 hours from baseline to week 3 after the end of the last stimulation

    Time frame: the average of pain scores (NRS for pain intensity) will be conducted before each treatment for up to 3 weeks after each treatment session (treatment effect)

    Comparison between the efficacy of sham, rTMS and H coil on average pain intensity over the course of the treatment

Secondary outcomes

  1. Score of each neuropathic dimension (ie symptom combinations) on the Neuropathic pain symptom inventory (NPSI) (Bouhassira et al 2004) .

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    This validated questionnaire for neuropathic pain quantifies the mean intensity of 10 neuropathic symptoms and their combination into 5 distinct dimensions during the last 24 hours on 11-point (0-10) numerical scales.

  2. proportion of responders

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    proportion of patients achieving at least 30 % and 50 % pain relief as compared to prestimulation values allowing to calculate Numbers Needed to Treat for 30 % and 50 % pain relief.

  3. intensity of average pain

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    Numerical pain scale for average pain intensity from the the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) rated from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximal pain imaginable)

  4. Pain interference

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    7 items for pain interference of the BPI rated from 0 (does not interfere), to 10 (complete interference) to measure the impact of pain on general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep and enjoyment of life

  5. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD)

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    14 items scored as anxiety and depression scores (each on 21)

  6. French version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    The PCS consists of 13 items describing the thoughts and feelings that individuals may experience when in pain (range 0-52); the patients' overall impression of change (PGIC) on a 7-point scale (from very much improved to very much worse).

  7. Intensity of maximal pain over the past 24 hours

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    Maximal pain intensity from the Brief Pain Inventory

  8. sensory and affective score of the short form McGill Pain questionnaire

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    15 items, of which 11 assess the sensory dimension of pain (rated on 44) and 4 assess the affective dimension of pain (rated on 15).

  9. Intensity of least pain over the past 24 hours

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    Intensity of least pain on NRS from the Brief Pain Inventory

  10. intensity of brush induced allodynia

    Time frame: 1 week and 3 weeks after the end of each stimulation period

    measured with a brush (SOMEDIC) (mean of 3 stimulations) in the area of maximal pain on a 0-10 NRS

  11. side effects

    Time frame: immediately after each rTMS session

    specific side effects questionnaire specifically designed for assessment of safety in rTMS studies

  12. blinding

    Time frame: 3 weeks after the end of the second stimulation period

    blinding questionnaire

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Hospital Ambroise Paré Paris

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Comparison of the Analgesic Effects of Two Methods of Repetitive Magnetic Transcranial Stimulation: A Randomized Double Blind Sham Controlled Study in Patients With Central Neuropathic Pain

Acronym: HNEP

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2021
Study completion
2021
First posted
Dec 12, 2017
Registry last updated
Oct 17, 2022

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.