Cargando…
Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
BACKGROUND: Which noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) treatment – transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) – is more beneficial for stroke patients’ cognitive rehabilitation is still up for debate. OBJECTIVES: Our goal is to provide an overview of th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10272674/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37332390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20406223231168754 |
_version_ | 1785059550292869120 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Yao Liu, Wan Chen, Jiu Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao Ma, Hongxia Rao, Jiang Xu, Guangxu |
author_facet | Wang, Yao Liu, Wan Chen, Jiu Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao Ma, Hongxia Rao, Jiang Xu, Guangxu |
author_sort | Wang, Yao |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Which noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) treatment – transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) – is more beneficial for stroke patients’ cognitive rehabilitation is still up for debate. OBJECTIVES: Our goal is to provide an overview of the research on the effectiveness and safety of various NIBS protocols. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: This NMA compared any active NIBS versus sham stimulation in adult stroke survivors to enhance cognitive function, with a focus on global cognitive function (GCF), attention, memory, and executive function (EF) using the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The NMA statistical approach was built on a frequency framework. The effect size was estimated by the standardized mean difference (SMD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI). We compiled a relative ranking of the competing interventions based on their surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: NMA showed that high-frequency repeated TMS (HF-rTMS) improved GCF compared with sham stimulation (SMD = 1.95; 95% CI: 0.47–3.43), while dual-tDCS improved memory performance versus sham stimulation significantly (SMD = 6.38; 95% CI: 3.51–9.25). However, various NIBS stimulation protocols revealed no significant impact on enhancing attention, executive function, or activities of daily living. There was no significant difference between the active stimulation protocols for TMS and tDCS and sham stimulation in terms of safety. Subgroup analysis demonstrated an effect favoring activation site of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (SUCRA = 89.1) for enhancing GCF and bilateral DLPFC (SUCRA = 99.9) stimulation for enhancing memory performance. CONCLUSION: The HF-rTMS over the left DLPFC appears to be the most promising NIBS therapeutic option for improving global cognitive performance after stroke, according to a comparison of numerous NIBS protocols. Furthermore, for patients with post-stroke memory impairment, dual-tDCS over bilateral DLPFC may be more advantageous than other NIBS protocols. Both tDCS and TMS are reasonably safe. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42022304865 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10272674 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102726742023-06-17 Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Wang, Yao Liu, Wan Chen, Jiu Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao Ma, Hongxia Rao, Jiang Xu, Guangxu Ther Adv Chronic Dis Meta-Analysis BACKGROUND: Which noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) treatment – transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) – is more beneficial for stroke patients’ cognitive rehabilitation is still up for debate. OBJECTIVES: Our goal is to provide an overview of the research on the effectiveness and safety of various NIBS protocols. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: This NMA compared any active NIBS versus sham stimulation in adult stroke survivors to enhance cognitive function, with a focus on global cognitive function (GCF), attention, memory, and executive function (EF) using the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The NMA statistical approach was built on a frequency framework. The effect size was estimated by the standardized mean difference (SMD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI). We compiled a relative ranking of the competing interventions based on their surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: NMA showed that high-frequency repeated TMS (HF-rTMS) improved GCF compared with sham stimulation (SMD = 1.95; 95% CI: 0.47–3.43), while dual-tDCS improved memory performance versus sham stimulation significantly (SMD = 6.38; 95% CI: 3.51–9.25). However, various NIBS stimulation protocols revealed no significant impact on enhancing attention, executive function, or activities of daily living. There was no significant difference between the active stimulation protocols for TMS and tDCS and sham stimulation in terms of safety. Subgroup analysis demonstrated an effect favoring activation site of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (SUCRA = 89.1) for enhancing GCF and bilateral DLPFC (SUCRA = 99.9) stimulation for enhancing memory performance. CONCLUSION: The HF-rTMS over the left DLPFC appears to be the most promising NIBS therapeutic option for improving global cognitive performance after stroke, according to a comparison of numerous NIBS protocols. Furthermore, for patients with post-stroke memory impairment, dual-tDCS over bilateral DLPFC may be more advantageous than other NIBS protocols. Both tDCS and TMS are reasonably safe. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42022304865 SAGE Publications 2023-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10272674/ /pubmed/37332390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20406223231168754 Text en © The Author(s), 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Meta-Analysis Wang, Yao Liu, Wan Chen, Jiu Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao Ma, Hongxia Rao, Jiang Xu, Guangxu Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title | Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full | Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_short | Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_sort | comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation therapies for recovery of global cognitive function, attention, memory, and executive function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
topic | Meta-Analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10272674/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37332390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20406223231168754 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangyao comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT liuwan comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT chenjiu comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT baijianling comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT yuhao comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT mahongxia comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT raojiang comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xuguangxu comparativeefficacyofdifferentnoninvasivebrainstimulationtherapiesforrecoveryofglobalcognitivefunctionattentionmemoryandexecutivefunctionafterstrokeanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |