Cargando…

Non-invasive electrical brain stimulation for vision restoration after stroke: An exploratory randomized trial (REVIS)

BACKGROUND: Occipital strokes often cause permanent homonymous hemianopia leading to significant disability. In previous studies, non-invasive electrical brain stimulation (NIBS) has improved vision after optic nerve damage and in combination with training after stroke. OBJECTIVE: We explored differ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Räty, Silja, Borrmann, Carolin, Granata, Giuseppe, Cárdenas-Morales, Lizbeth, Schoenfeld, Ariel, Sailer, Michael, Silvennoinen, Katri, Holopainen, Juha, De Rossi, Francesca, Antal, Andrea, Rossini, Paolo M., Tatlisumak, Turgut, Sabel, Bernhard A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: IOS Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461672/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34219679
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/RNN-211198
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Occipital strokes often cause permanent homonymous hemianopia leading to significant disability. In previous studies, non-invasive electrical brain stimulation (NIBS) has improved vision after optic nerve damage and in combination with training after stroke. OBJECTIVE: We explored different NIBS modalities for rehabilitation of hemianopia after chronic stroke. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, three-armed trial, altogether 56 patients with homonymous hemianopia were recruited. The three experiments were: i) repetitive transorbital alternating current stimulation (rtACS, n = 8) vs. rtACS with prior cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation over the intact visual cortex (tDCS/rtACS, n = 8) vs. sham (n = 8); ii) rtACS (n = 9) vs. sham (n = 9); and iii) tDCS of the visual cortex (n = 7) vs. sham (n = 7). Visual functions were evaluated before and after the intervention, and after eight weeks follow-up. The primary outcome was change in visual field assessed by high-resolution and standard perimetries. The individual modalities were compared within each experimental arm. RESULTS: Primary outcomes in Experiments 1 and 2 were negative. Only significant between-group change was observed in Experiment 3, where tDCS increased visual field of the contralesional eye compared to sham. tDCS/rtACS improved dynamic vision, reading, and visual field of the contralesional eye, but was not superior to other groups. rtACS alone increased foveal sensitivity, but was otherwise ineffective. All trial-related procedures were tolerated well. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory trial showed safety but no main effect of NIBS on vision restoration after stroke. However, tDCS and combined tDCS/rtACS induced improvements in visually guided performance that need to be confirmed in larger-sample trials. NCT01418820 (clinicaltrials.gov)