The efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation interventions in obsessive-compulsive disorder management: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been widely used as an alternative treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). However, the most effective NIBS parameters are unclear. To compare the efficacy of NIBS in OCD. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analyses (NMA) to combine direct and indirect comparisons of NIBS.Systematic searches were conducted in Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to June 20, 2025. Forty-two randomized sham-controlled trials (n = 1456) were included. All statistical analyses were conducted with R statistical software. Bayesian NMAs mainly using the BUGSnet package and gemtc package. Five NIBS protocols produced statistically significant reductions in Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) scores compared with sham stimulation: high-frequency rTMS over the FzFCz (Hf-rTMS-FzFCz; MD -11.77, 95% CrI -20.62 to -3.09), low-frequency rTMS over F3F4 (Lf-rTMS-F3F4; MD -9.93, 95% CrI -18.07 to -1.65), low-frequency rTMS over FCz (Lf-rTMS-FCz; MD -3.25, 95% CrI -6.06 to -0.40), high-frequency deep TMS over FzFC (Hf-dTMS-FzFC; MD -6.48, 95% CrI -12.32 to -0.50), and 2 mA anodal tDCS over F3 with cathodal over Fp2 (MD -9.34, 95% CrI -16.01 to -3.03).For secondary outcomes, high-frequency deep rTMS over FzFCz produced the largest reduction both in depressive symptoms (SMD -1.24, 95% CrI -1.92 to -0.55) and anxiety scores (SMD -1.88, 95% CrI -2.62 to -1.11), but had no effect on Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scores.Specific NIBS protocols are safe and effective adjunctive treatments for OCD, with promising yet inconclusive improvements in comorbid depressive symptoms. Further high-quality, head-to-head trials are needed.