rTMS for chronic tinnitus: multicenter randomized sham-controlled trial (negative)

Record details

Authors: Landgrebe M, et al.
Journal / source: Brain Stimulation (2017)
Design: Multicenter randomized sham-controlled trial; 1-Hz left temporal rTMS, 10 sessions; ISRCTN89848288
Sample: 163 randomized (75 real / 78 sham)
Primary endpoint: Tinnitus Questionnaire change, baseline → day 12
Randomized: Yes · Sham/placebo-controlled: Yes · Independent of the manufacturer: Yes

What this research found

NEGATIVE: TQ change −0.5 (real) vs +0.5 (sham); adjusted difference −1.0 [95% CI −3.2, 1.2], p=0.36. Well tolerated; not superior to sham.

The largest multicenter rTMS tinnitus trial. Together with Folmer 2015 (positive), it defines the conflicting replication picture for rTMS.

Limitations and conflicts of interest

Short 10-session protocol; day-12 primary timepoint.

Funding / conflicts: Independent.

Primary sources

Used as evidence for

rTMS (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation)

This is an original summary from the Tinnitus Evidence verified database, checked against the primary source — not a reproduction of the publisher's abstract.