Table 2.

Overview of the rTMS studies included in the review.

Study		Patients features			rTMS features		Findings
Ref	Design	MS type	Sample size (gender, age)	Pain type	Target	Protocol	Primary outcomes	Secondary outcomes	Follow up	Side effects	Results
Seada et al. (2013)	Randomized, parallel (control group: LLT)	NS	30 (age 56.4 ± 6.6)	TN	NS	10 Hz, 50 mA, 20 min	Pain NRS	Oral mouth opening, masseter and temporalis muscle tension and CMAP	None	NS	Both groups improved, no statistical comparison between the two groups
Korzhova et al. (2019)	Randomized, parallel, single blind sham-controlled	SP	34 (W: 20, M: 14)	Spasticity pain	M1	Ten sessions for 5 days for 2 weeks; HF rTMS (20 Hz, 30 min); iTBS (35 Hz, 1,200 pulses, 10 min)	Spasticity (MAS, NAS, SESS)	Pain, fatigue (MFIS)	2 and 12 weeks	None	MAS significantly improved to HF rTMS and iTBS; SESS significantly improved to iTBS and lasted at follow-up; pain and fatigue significantly improved to HF rTMS

CMAP, compound muscle action potential; HF, high frequency; Hz, hertz; iTBS, intermittent theta-burst stimulation; LLT, low-level laser therapy; M, men; mA, milliampere; MAS, Modified Ashworth Scale; MFIS, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory Score; MS, multiple sclerosis; M1, primary motor cortex; NAS, numerical analog scale; NRS, numerical rating scale; NS, not specified; Ref, reference; rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; SESS, Subjective Evaluating Spasticity Scale; SP, secondary progressive; tDCS, transcranial direct current stimulation; TNP, trigeminal neuropathy; W, women.