Cargando…

Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke

Introduction/Objectives: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation are two powerful non-invasive neuromodulatory therapies that have the potential to alter and evaluate the integrity of the corticospinal tract. Moreover, recent evidence has shown...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Adeyemo, Bamidele O., Simis, Marcel, Macea, Debora Duarte, Fregni, Felipe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3495265/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23162477
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00088
_version_ 1782249476763680768
author Adeyemo, Bamidele O.
Simis, Marcel
Macea, Debora Duarte
Fregni, Felipe
author_facet Adeyemo, Bamidele O.
Simis, Marcel
Macea, Debora Duarte
Fregni, Felipe
author_sort Adeyemo, Bamidele O.
collection PubMed
description Introduction/Objectives: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation are two powerful non-invasive neuromodulatory therapies that have the potential to alter and evaluate the integrity of the corticospinal tract. Moreover, recent evidence has shown that brain stimulation might be beneficial in stroke recovery. Therefore, investigating and investing in innovative therapies that may improve neurorehabilitative stroke recovery are next steps in research and development. Participants/Materials and Methods: This article presents an up-to-date systematic review of the treatment effects of rTMS and tDCS on motor function. A literary search was conducted, utilizing search terms “stroke” and “transcranial stimulation.” Items were excluded if they failed to: (1) include stroke patients, (2) study motor outcomes, or (3) include rTMS/tDCS as treatments. Other exclusions included: (1) reviews, editorials, and letters, (2) animal or pediatric populations, (3) case reports or sample sizes ≤2 patients, and (4) primary outcomes of dysphagia, dysarthria, neglect, or swallowing. Results: Investigation of PubMed English Database prior to 01/01/2012 produced 695 applicable results. Studies were excluded based on the aforementioned criteria, resulting in 50 remaining studies. They included 1314 participants (1282 stroke patients and 32 healthy subjects) evaluated by motor function pre- and post-tDCS or rTMS. Heterogeneity among studies’ motor assessments was high and could not be accounted for by individual comparison. Pooled effect sizes for the impact of post-treatment improvement revealed consistently demonstrable improvements after tDCS and rTMS therapeutic stimulation. Most studies provided limited follow-up for long-term effects. Conclusion: It is apparent from the available studies that non-invasive stimulation may enhance motor recovery and may lead to clinically meaningful functional improvements in the stroke population. Only mild to no adverse events have been reported. Though results have been positive results, the large heterogeneity across articles precludes firm conclusions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3495265
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34952652012-11-16 Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke Adeyemo, Bamidele O. Simis, Marcel Macea, Debora Duarte Fregni, Felipe Front Psychiatry Psychiatry Introduction/Objectives: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation are two powerful non-invasive neuromodulatory therapies that have the potential to alter and evaluate the integrity of the corticospinal tract. Moreover, recent evidence has shown that brain stimulation might be beneficial in stroke recovery. Therefore, investigating and investing in innovative therapies that may improve neurorehabilitative stroke recovery are next steps in research and development. Participants/Materials and Methods: This article presents an up-to-date systematic review of the treatment effects of rTMS and tDCS on motor function. A literary search was conducted, utilizing search terms “stroke” and “transcranial stimulation.” Items were excluded if they failed to: (1) include stroke patients, (2) study motor outcomes, or (3) include rTMS/tDCS as treatments. Other exclusions included: (1) reviews, editorials, and letters, (2) animal or pediatric populations, (3) case reports or sample sizes ≤2 patients, and (4) primary outcomes of dysphagia, dysarthria, neglect, or swallowing. Results: Investigation of PubMed English Database prior to 01/01/2012 produced 695 applicable results. Studies were excluded based on the aforementioned criteria, resulting in 50 remaining studies. They included 1314 participants (1282 stroke patients and 32 healthy subjects) evaluated by motor function pre- and post-tDCS or rTMS. Heterogeneity among studies’ motor assessments was high and could not be accounted for by individual comparison. Pooled effect sizes for the impact of post-treatment improvement revealed consistently demonstrable improvements after tDCS and rTMS therapeutic stimulation. Most studies provided limited follow-up for long-term effects. Conclusion: It is apparent from the available studies that non-invasive stimulation may enhance motor recovery and may lead to clinically meaningful functional improvements in the stroke population. Only mild to no adverse events have been reported. Though results have been positive results, the large heterogeneity across articles precludes firm conclusions. Frontiers Media S.A. 2012-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC3495265/ /pubmed/23162477 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00088 Text en Copyright © 2012 Adeyemo, Simis, Macea and Fregni. http://www.frontiersin.org/licenseagreement This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc.
spellingShingle Psychiatry
Adeyemo, Bamidele O.
Simis, Marcel
Macea, Debora Duarte
Fregni, Felipe
Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke
title Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke
title_full Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke
title_fullStr Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke
title_full_unstemmed Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke
title_short Systematic Review of Parameters of Stimulation, Clinical Trial Design Characteristics, and Motor Outcomes in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke
title_sort systematic review of parameters of stimulation, clinical trial design characteristics, and motor outcomes in non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke
topic Psychiatry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3495265/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23162477
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00088
work_keys_str_mv AT adeyemobamideleo systematicreviewofparametersofstimulationclinicaltrialdesigncharacteristicsandmotoroutcomesinnoninvasivebrainstimulationinstroke
AT simismarcel systematicreviewofparametersofstimulationclinicaltrialdesigncharacteristicsandmotoroutcomesinnoninvasivebrainstimulationinstroke
AT maceadeboraduarte systematicreviewofparametersofstimulationclinicaltrialdesigncharacteristicsandmotoroutcomesinnoninvasivebrainstimulationinstroke
AT fregnifelipe systematicreviewofparametersofstimulationclinicaltrialdesigncharacteristicsandmotoroutcomesinnoninvasivebrainstimulationinstroke