Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be applied in different paradigms to obtain a measure of various aspects of cortical excitability. These different TMS paradigms provide information about different neurotransmitter systems, enhance our understanding about the pathophysiology of neuropsychiatric conditions, and in the future may be helpful as a guide for pharmacological interventions. In addition, repetitive TMS (rTMS) modulates cortical excitability beyond the duration of the rTMS trains themselves. Depending on rTMS parameters, a lasting inhibition or facilitation of cortical excitability can be induced. These effects can be demonstrated neurophysiologically or by combining rTMS with neuroimaging techniques. The effects do not remain limited to the cortical area directly targeted by rTMS, but affect a wider neural network transynaptically. Modulation of cortical excitability by rTMS may in the future be useful not only as a research tool but also as a therapeutic intervention in neurology, psychiatry, and neurorehabilitation.

Objective: To study the short-term effects of slow repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the motor cortex on cortical excitability and handwriting in patients with writer’s cramp. Background: Cortical excitability of the primary motor cortex is abnormally enhanced in patients with writer’s cramp. Therefore, reducing cortical excitability by low-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex might result in beneficial effects on handwriting in writer’s cramp. Design/Methods: We studied the effects of subthreshold 1-Hz rTMS on motor threshold and cortico-cortical excitability using the paired-pulse technique in seven patients and seven controls. In another 16 patients and 11 age-matched controls we evaluated changes in cortical excitability by measuring the stimulus-response curve and the postexcitatory silent period before and after subthreshold 1-Hz rTMS. In addition, we analyzed the handwriting before and 20 minutes after 1-Hz rTMS. Results: In the first experiment, low-frequency rTMS resulted in a normalization of the deficient cortico-cortical inhibition in the patients without affecting motor threshold. In the second experiment, 1-Hz rTMS resulted in a significant prolongation of the postexcitatory silent period without affecting the stimulus-response curve in the patient group. Moreover, the dystonic patients showed a significant reduction of mean writing pressure after subthreshold 1-Hz rTMS that was associated with clear but transient improvement in six patients. Conclusions: In some patients 1-Hz rTMS can reinforce deficient intracortical inhibition and may improve handwriting temporarily. Our data support the notion that reduced intracortical inhibition plays a part in the pathophysiology of focal dystonia.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex and techniques of visual illusion, applied isolated or combined, in patients with neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury. In a sham controlled, double-blind, parallel group design, 39 patients were randomized into four groups receiving transcranial direct current stimulation with walking visual illusion or with control illusion and sham stimulation with visual illusion or with control illusion. For transcranial direct current stimulation, the anode was placed over the primary motor cortex. Each patient received ten treatment sessions during two consecutive weeks. Clinical assessment was performed before, after the last day of treatment, after 2 and 4 weeks follow-up and after 12 weeks. Clinical assessment included overall pain intensity perception, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory and Brief Pain Inventory. The combination of transcranial direct current stimulation and visual illusion reduced the intensity of neuropathic pain significantly more than any of the single interventions. Patients receiving transcranial direct current stimulation and visual illusion experienced a significant improvement in all pain subtypes, while patients in the transcranial direct current stimulation group showed improvement in continuous and paroxysmal pain, and those in the visual illusion group improved only in continuous pain and dysaesthesias. At 12 weeks after treatment, the combined treatment group still presented significant improvement on the overall pain intensity perception, whereas no improvements were reported in the other three groups. Our results demonstrate that transcranial direct current stimulation and visual illusion can be effective in the management of neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury, with minimal side effects and with good tolerability.