Table 1: Summary of the studies on rTMS in the treatment of nicotine addiction.

Study subjects (active, sham)Place of stimulationNumber of sessionsLengthFrequencyIntensity of stimulationSham stimulationAssessmentFindings

Johann et al. (2003) [46]11Left DLPFC1 session20 trains of 2.5 s20 Hz90% MTYesCraving, assessed by VASReduction in craving

Eichhammer et al. (2003) [47]14Left DLPFC4 sessions
(2 active and 2 sham)
20 trains of 2.5 s20 Hz90% MTYes
(between the group)
Craving, assessed by VAS; cigarettes number Reduction in consumption

Amiaz et al. (2009) [48]22, 26Left DLPFC10 sessions 20 trains of 5 s 10 Hz100% MTYesCraving, assessed VAS; cigarettes numberReduction in craving, consumption, and dependence

Wing et al. (2012) [49, 66]6, 9Bilateral DLPFC20 sessions50 trains20 Hz90% MTYesCraving, assessed by TQSUReduction in craving

Rose et al. (2011) [50]15SFG3 sessions
(1 active 1 Hz, 1 active 10 Hz, 1 MOC)
2.5 min each session (total period of stimulation: 7.5 min)1 Hz or 10 Hz 90% MTYesCraving, assessed by Shiffman-Jarvik questionnaire and cigarette evaluation questionnaireReduction in craving (10 Hz)

DLPFC: dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; SFG: superior frontal gyrus; MOC: motor cortex; MT: motor threshold; VAS: visual analogue scale; TQSU: Tiffany Questionnaire for Smoking Urges.