Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Mar 24.
Published in final edited form as: Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015 Oct 9;59:184–200. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.10.001

Table 2.

Summary of studies assessing craving with TMS and tES in AUD.

Author, year Subjects (N) Experimental Design NIBS parameters Targeted regions Abstinence Level Craving and intake measures Main results
Mishra et al., 2011 Alcoholics (45) Single blind, Sham-controlled, Parallel rTMS
10 sessions
10 Hz
110% RMT
1000 pulses		 R DLPFC Abstinent, in-clinic ACQ-NOW 5 factors
and GCI 2 factors		 Craving: Reduced immediately after the stimulation period and after 1 month (active vs. sham).
Höppner et al., 2011 Alcoholics (19) Single-blind, Sham-controlled, Parallel rTMS
10 sessions
20Hz
90% RMT
1000 pulses		 L DLPFC Abstinent, in-clinic OCDS Craving: No changes (active vs. sham)
De Ridder et al., 2011 Detoxified Alcoholics (1) Case report rTMS
15 sessions
1 Hz
600 pulses		 Dorsal ACC Abstinent Craving VAS before and after drinking cues
Intake: Blood alcohol volume assessed with a breathalizer		 Cue-provoked craving: Reduced for three months after termination of the stimulation protocol (3 weeks).
Intake: Reduced during the stimulation protocol
Withdrawal symptoms: reduced.
Herremans et al., 2012 Detoxified alcoholics (36) Single-blind, Sham-controlled, Parallel rTMS
1 sessions
20 Hz
110% RMT
1560 pulses		 R DLPFC Abstinent, in-clinic 14 items OCDS Craving: No changes (active vs. sham)
Herremans et al., 2013 Detoxified alcoholics (29) Single blind, Sham-controlled, Crossover rTMS
20 Hz
110% RMT
1560 pulses		 R DLPFC Abstinent, in-clinic 14 items OCDS Craving: No changes (active vs. sham)
Boggio et al., 2008 Detoxified alcoholics (13) Double-blind, Sham-controlled Crossover tES
1 session
2 mA
20 min		 Anodal
L DLPFC coupled with cathodal R DLPFC;
Anodal
R DLPFC coupled with cathodal L DLPFC		 Abstinent 16 items AUQ before and after drinking and neutral cues Cue-provoked craving: Reduced (active (both configurations) vs. sham).
Nakamura-Palacios et al., 2012 Alcoholics (49) Single-blind, Sham-controlled, Parallel tES
1 session
1 mA
10 min		 Anodal L DLPFC, Cathodal R supradeltoid area 7 days abstinence 5 items OCDS
before and after drinking and neutral cues		 Craving: no changes (active vs sham)
da Silva et al., 2013 Male, Lesch’s type IV alcoholics (13) Single-blind, Sham-controlled, Parallel tES
5 weekly sessions during 5 consecutive weeks
2 mA
20 min		 Anodal L DLPFC coupled with cathodal R supraorbital area Abstinent in-clinic patients
5 items OCDS
before and after drinking cues		 Cue-provoked craving: active and sham tDCS decreased cravings
den Uyl et al., 2015 Hazardous drinkers (41) Double-blind, Sham-controlled, Parallel tES
1 session
1 mA
10 min		 Anodal L DLPFC coupled with cathodal R supraorbital area;
Anodal L IFG coupled with cathodal R supraorbital area		 No abstinence 14 items AAAQ before and after tDCS Craving: Reduced after active tDCS with anode over L DLPFC and cathode over R supraorbital area