Despite no observable external sound present, a perceived feeling of a recurrent unpleasant sound is a main complaint in the patients with chronic tinnitus. This phantom perception of sound is considered as the auditory equivalent of phantom limb pain, and altered excitability may be involved in its underlying pathology. Tinnitus-related hyper-excitation is suppressed by inhibitory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). However, the neural mechanism underlying the treatment is not fully understood, and quantifying the suppression induced by rTMS has yet to be considered.
Methods:
We evaluated the effect of rTMS on the cortical inhibition status following single-site stimulation over the auditory temporal cortex (T group) or dual-site stimulation over the auditory temporal and the frontal regions (TF group). These effects were also compared with outcomes following sham stimulation (S group). Subjective response was recorded using tinnitus-related handicap index (THI), and changes in the cortical inhibition status were assessed using an auditory paired-pulse suppression index (PPSI).
Results:
TF group showed the greatest benefit from the treatment evidenced in the reduced PPSI and THI scores. T and S groups did not benefit much. TF group overlapped mostly with the responder group, indicating improvement in both subjective THI and objective PPSI measurements.
Conclusion:
Our results suggest that rTMS is a beneficial therapeutic treatment for chronic tinnitus patients and the dual-site treatment was the most effective in terms of both tinnitus complaint and quantitative indices. Thus, subjective reports and electrophysiological signatures may be complementary for the diagnosis/prognosis of tinnitus.
EggermontJJRobertsLE. The neuroscience of tinnitus. Trends Neurosci. 2004;27(11):676-682.
2.
KafkaM. Tinnitus aurium, etiology, differential diagnosis, treatment and review of twenty-five cases. Laryngoscope. 1934;44(28).
3.
De RidderDElgoyhenABRomoRLangguthB. Phantom percepts: tinnitus and pain as persisting aversive memory networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(20):8075-8080.
4.
De RidderDVerstraetenEVan der KelenKet al. Transcranial magnetic stimulation for tinnitus: influence of tinnitus duration on stimulation parameter choice and maximal tinnitus suppression. Otol Neurotol. 2005;26(4):616-619.
5.
LangguthBKleinjungTMarienhagenJet al. Transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of tinnitus: effects on cortical excitability. BMC Neurosci. 2007;8:45.
6.
ChengCHChanPYNiddamDMTsaiSYHsuSCLiuCY. Sensory gating, inhibition control and gamma oscillations in the human somatosensory cortex. Sci Rep. 2016;6:20437.
7.
JessenFKucharskiCFriesTet al. Sensory gating deficit expressed by a disturbed suppression of the P50 event-related potential in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(8):1319-1321.
8.
LenzMHoffkenOStudePet al. Bilateral somatosensory cortex disinhibition in complex regional pain syndrome type I. Neurology. 2011;77(11):1096-1101.
9.
LukhaninaEBerezetskayaNKarabanI. Paired-pulse inhibition in the auditory cortex in Parkinson’s disease and its dependence on clinical characteristics of the patients. Parkinsons Dis. 2010;2011:342151.
10.
NobreMJCabralABrandaoML. GABAergic regulation of auditory sensory gating in low- and high-anxiety rats submitted to a fear conditioning procedure. Neuroscience. 2010;171(4):1152-1163.
11.
BayazitovITWestmorelandJJZakharenkoSS. Forward suppression in the auditory cortex is caused by the Ca(v)3.1 calcium channel-mediated switch from bursting to tonic firing at thalamocortical projections. J Neurosci. 2013;33(48):18940-18950.
12.
HallettM. Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the human brain. Nature. 2000;406(6792):147-150.
13.
De RidderDDe MulderGWalshVMuggletonNSunaertSMollerA. Magnetic and electrical stimulation of the auditory cortex for intractable tinnitus. Case report. J Neurosurg. 2004;100(3):560-564.
14.
EichhammerPKleinjungTLandgrebeMHajakGLangguthB. TMS for treatment of chronic tinnitus: neurobiological effects. Prog Brain Res. 2007;166:369-375.
15.
LangguthBde RidderDDornhofferJLet al. Controversy: does repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation/transcranial direct current stimulation show efficacy in treating tinnitus patients?Brain Stimul. 2008;1(3):192-205.
16.
NohTSKyongJSChangMYet al. Comparison of treatment outcomes following either prefrontal cortical-only or dual-site repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in chronic tinnitus patients: a double-blind randomized study. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38(2):296-303.
17.
LefaucheurJPAndre-ObadiaNAntalAet al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(11):2150-2206.
18.
KleinjungTSteffensTLonderoALangguthB. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment of chronic tinnitus: clinical effects. Prog Brain Res. 2007;166:359-367.
19.
De RidderDSongJJVannesteS. Frontal cortex TMS for tinnitus. Brain Stimul. 2013;6(3):355-362.
20.
KreuzerPMLandgrebeMSchecklmannMet al. Can temporal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation be enhanced by targeting affective components of tinnitus with frontal rTMS? A randomized controlled pilot trial. Front Syst Neurosci. 2011;5:88.
21.
IbbotsonW. Tinnitus. Postgrad Med J. 1931;6(67):110-122.
SchmidtSAAkrofiKCarpenter-ThompsonJRHusainFT. Default mode, dorsal attention and auditory resting state networks exhibit differential functional connectivity in tinnitus and hearing loss. PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e76488.
24.
LehnerASchecklmannMGreenleeMWRupprechtRLangguthB. Triple-site rTMS for the treatment of chronic tinnitus: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2016;6:22302.
25.
David-JurgensMDinseHR. Effects of aging on paired-pulse behavior of rat somatosensory cortical neurons. Cereb Cortex. 2010;20(5):1208-1216.
26.
LimMRoosinkMKimJSet al. Disinhibition of the primary somatosensory cortex in patients with fibromyalgia. Pain. 2015;156(4):666-674.
27.
MatsuzakiJKagitani-ShimonoKSugataHet al. Progressively increased M50 responses to repeated sounds in autism spectrum disorder with auditory hypersensitivity: a magnetoencephalographic study. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e102599.
28.
SiniatchkinMKroppPGerberWD. What kind of habituation is impaired in migraine patients?Cephalalgia. 2003;23(7):511-518.
29.
De RidderDVannesteSWeiszNet al. An integrative model of auditory phantom perception: tinnitus as a unified percept of interacting separable subnetworks. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014;44:16-32.
30.
LlinasRRRibaryUJeanmonodDKronbergEMitraPP. Thalamocortical dysrhythmia: a neurological and neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by magnetoencephalography. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96(26):15222-15227.
31.
CristanchoPWilsonMBKallogjeriDNicklausJCornellMPiccirilloJF. rTMS bimodal treatment for patients with subjective idiopathic tinnitus: a pilot study of high-dose stimulation. Brain Stimul. 2014;7(3):489-491.
32.
DavidsonJ. Drug therapy of post-traumatic stress disorder. Br J Psychiatry. 1992;160:309-314.
33.
SchmidtBHanslmayrS. Resting frontal EEG alpha-asymmetry predicts the evaluation of affective musical stimuli. Neurosci Lett. 2009;460(3):237-240.
34.
NohTSRahYCKyongJSet al. Comparison of treatment outcomes between 10 and 20 EEG electrode location system-guided and neuronavigation-guided repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in chronic tinnitus patients and target localization in the Asian brain. Acta Otolaryngol. 2017;137(9):945-951.
35.
DavisHKranzF. The international audiometric zero. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1964;73:807-815.
36.
RheeMKLJungHYChoiJHKimSHKimYK. A standardization study of Beck Depression Inventory (II): Korean version (K-DBI): validity. Korean Journal of Psychopathology. 1995;4.
37.
HahnDWLLeeCHChonKK. Korean adaptation of Spielberger’s STAI (K-STAI). Korean Journal of Health Psychology. 1996;1.
38.
SohnSIKimDHLeeMYChoYW. The reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Sleep Breath. 2012;16:803-812.
39.
HallDA. Designing clinical trials for assessing the effectiveness of interventions for tinnitus. Trends Hear. 2017;21:2331216517736689.
40.
HallDAHaiderHKikidisDet al. Toward a global consensus on outcome measures for clinical trials in tinnitus: report from the First International Meeting of the COMiT Initiative, November 14, 2014, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Trends Hear. 2015;19.
41.
KlemGHLudersHOJasperHHElgerC. The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl. 1999;52:3-6.
42.
LangguthBHajakGKleinjungTPridmoreSSandPEichhammerP. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and chronic tinnitus. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 2006;(556):102-105.
KimSIKimMGKimSSByunJYParkMSYeoSG. Evaluation of tinnitus patients by audiometric configuration. Am J Otolaryngol. 2016;37(1):1-5.
45.
HenryJADennisKCSchechterMA. General review of tinnitus: prevalence, mechanisms, effects, and management. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005;48(5):1204-1235.
46.
KuYAhnJWKwonCet al. The gap-prepulse inhibition deficit of the cortical N1-P2 complex in patients with tinnitus: the effect of gap duration. Hear Res. 2017;348:120-128.
47.
BarwoodCHWilsonWJMalickaANet al. The effect of rTMS on auditory processing in adults with chronic, bilateral tinnitus: a placebo-controlled pilot study. Brain Stimul. 2013;6(5):752-759.
48.
BellAJSejnowskiTJ. An information-maximization approach to blind separation and blind deconvolution. Neural Comput. 1995;7(6):1129-1159.
49.
LeeTWGirolamiMSejnowskiTJ. Independent component analysis using an extended infomax algorithm for mixed subgaussian and supergaussian sources. Neural Comput. 1999;11(2):417-441.
50.
MakeigSJungTPBellAJGhahremaniDSejnowskiTJ. Blind separation of auditory event-related brain responses into independent components. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94(20):10979-10984.
51.
HydeDCSpelkeES. Spatiotemporal dynamics of processing nonsymbolic number: an event-related potential source localization study. Hum Brain Mapp. 2012;33(9):2189-2203.
52.
HoffkenOTannwitzJLenzMSczesny-KaiserMTegenthoffMSchwenkreisP. Influence of parameter settings on paired-pulse-suppression in somatosensory evoked potentials: a systematic analysis. Clin Neurophysiol. 2013;124(3):574-580.
53.
OostenveldRFriesPMarisESchoffelenJM. FieldTrip: open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data. Comput Intell Neurosci. 2011;2011:156869.
54.
DelormeAMakeigS. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods. 2004;134(1):9-21.
55.
FuchsMKastnerJWagnerMHawesSEbersoleJS. A standardized boundary element method volume conductor model. Clin Neurophysiol. 2002;113(5):702-712.
56.
PizzagalliDAOakesTRFoxASet al. Functional but not structural subgenual prefrontal cortex abnormalities in melancholia. Mol Psychiatry. 2004;9(4):325, 393-405.
57.
VolpeUMucciABucciPMerlottiEGalderisiSMajM. The cortical generators of P3a and P3b: a LORETA study. Brain Res Bull. 2007;73(4-6):220-230.
58.
RubinovMSpornsO. Complex network measures of brain connectivity: uses and interpretations. Neuroimage. 2010;52(3):1059-1069.
59.
BaccalaLASameshimaK. Partial directed coherence: a new concept in neural structure determination. Biol Cybern. 2001;84(6):463-474.
60.
WeiszNLuchingerCThutGMullerN. Effects of individual alpha rTMS applied to the auditory cortex and its implications for the treatment of chronic tinnitus. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014;35(1):14-29.
61.
KimKKimJSChungCK. Increased gamma connectivity in the human prefrontal cortex during the bereitschaftspotential. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:180.
62.
VannesteSSongJJDe RidderD. Tinnitus and musical hallucinosis: the same but more. Neuroimage. 2013;82:373-383.
63.
JamesGAThostensonJDBrownGet al. Neural activity during attentional conflict predicts reduction in tinnitus perception following rTMS. Brain Stimul. 2017;10(5):934-943.
64.
LantingCPBrileyPMSumnerCJKrumbholzK. Mechanisms of adaptation in human auditory cortex. J Neurophysiol. 2013;110(4):973-983.
65.
LeeHYChoiMSChangDSChoCS. Combined bifrontal transcranial direct current stimulation and tailor-made notched music training in chronic tinnitus. J Audiol Otol. 2017;21(1):22-27.
66.
ShimHJKwakMYAnYHKimDHKimYJKimHJ. Feasibility and safety of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation paired with notched music therapy for the treatment of chronic tinnitus. J Audiol Otol. 2015;19(3):159-167.
67.
VannesteSFregniFDe RidderD. Head-to-head comparison of transcranial random noise stimulation, transcranial AC stimulation, and transcranial DC stimulation for tinnitus. Front Psychiatry. 2013;4:158.
68.
ParkJHNohTSLeeJHet al. Difference in tinnitus treatment outcome according to the pulse number of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Otol Neurotol. 2015;36(8):1450-1456.
69.
GreiciusMDSrivastavaGReissALMenonV. Default-mode network activity distinguishes Alzheimer’s disease from healthy aging: evidence from functional MRI. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(13):4637-4642.
70.
SmithSMFoxPTMillerKLet al. Correspondence of the brain’s functional architecture during activation and rest. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(31):13040-13045.
71.
WeiszNMullerSSchleeWDohrmannKHartmannTElbertT. The neural code of auditory phantom perception. J Neurosci. 2007;27(6):1479-1484.
72.
LorenzIMullerNSchleeWLangguthBWeiszN. Short-term effects of single repetitive TMS sessions on auditory evoked activity in patients with chronic tinnitus. J Neurophysiol. 2010;104(3):1497-1505.
73.
MullerMMKeilAKisslerJGruberT. Suppression of the auditory middle-latency response and evoked gamma-band response in a paired-click paradigm. Exp Brain Res. 2001;136(4):474-479.
74.
KlimeschWSausengPHanslmayrS. EEG alpha oscillations: the inhibition-timing hypothesis. Brain Res Rev. 2007;53(1):63-88.
75.
MillerR. Theory of the normal waking EEG: from single neurones to waveforms in the alpha, beta and gamma frequency ranges. Int J Psychophysiol. 2007;64(1):18-23.
76.
SchecklmannMLehnerAGollmitzerJSchmidtESchleeWLangguthB. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation induces oscillatory power changes in chronic tinnitus. Front Cell Neurosci. 2015;9:421.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
