Dataset Information

Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The primary aim of this review is to evaluate the effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia. METHODS:Thirteen databases were systematically searched through July 2014. Studies had to meet pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Each study's methodological quality was examined. Effect sizes were calculated from extracted data and combined for an overall summary statistic. RESULTS:Eight randomized controlled trials were included. These trials revealed a significant, moderate pooled effect size (0.55; 95% CI=0.17, 0.93; p=0.004). Studies stimulating the affected hemisphere had a combined effect size of 0.46 (95% CI=-0.18, 1.11; p=0.16); studies stimulating the unaffected hemisphere had a combined effect size of 0.65 (95% CI=0.14, 1.16; p=0.01). At long-term follow up, three studies demonstrated a large but non-significant pooled effect size (0.81, p=0.11). CONCLUSIONS:This review found evidence for the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia. A significant effect size resulted when stimulating the unaffected rather than the affected hemisphere. This finding is in agreement with previous studies implicating the plasticity of cortical neurons in the unaffected hemisphere. SIGNIFICANCE:Non-invasive brain stimulation appears to assist cortical reorganization in post-stroke dysphagia but emerging factors highlight the need for more data.

SUBMITTER: Pisegna JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5326549 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Pisegna Jessica M JM Kaneoka Asako A Pearson William G WG Kumar Sandeep S Langmore Susan E SE

Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology 20150509 1

<h4>Objective</h4>The primary aim of this review is to evaluate the effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia.<h4>Methods</h4>Thirteen databases were systematically searched through July 2014. Studies had to meet pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Each study's methodological quality was examined. Effect sizes were calculated from extracted data and combined for an overall summary statistic.<h4>Results</h4>Eight randomized controlled trials were included. The ...[more]

PMID: 26070517

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDysphagia is a common sequelae after stroke. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a tool that has been used in the rehabilitation process to modify cortical excitability and improve dysphagia.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the effect of NIBS on dysphagia after stroke and compare the effects of two different NIBS.MethodsRandomized controlled trials about the effect of NIBS on dysphagia after stroke were retrieved from databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, and CBM, from inception to June 2021. The quality of the trials was assessed, and the data were extracted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A statistical analysis was carried out using RevMan 5.3 and ADDIS 1.16.8. The effect size was evaluated by using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsUltimately, 18 studies involving 738 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that NIBS could improve the dysphagia outcome and severity scale (DOSS) score (standard mean difference (SMD) = 1.44, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.08, P < 0.05) and the water swallow test score (SMD = 6.23, 95% CI 5.44 to 7.03, P < 0.05). NIBS could reduce the standardized swallowing assessment (SSA) score (SMD = -1.04, 95% CI -1.50 to -0.58, P < 0.05), the penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) score (SMD = -0.85, 95% CI -1.33 to -0.36, P < 0.05), and the functional dysphagia scale score (SMD = -1.05, 95% CI -1.48 to -0.62, P < 0.05). Network meta-analysis showed that the best probabilistic ranking of the effects of two different NIBS on the DOSS score is rTMS (P = 0.52) > tDCS (P = 0.48), the best probabilistic ranking of the SSA score is rTMS (P = 0.72) > tDCS (P = 0.28), and the best probabilistic ranking of the PAS score is rTMS (P = 0.68) > tDCS (P = 0.32).ConclusionExisting evidence showed that NIBS could improve swallowing dysfunction and reduce the occurrence of aspiration after stroke, and that rTMS is better than tDCS. Limited by the number of included studies, more large-sample, multicenter, double-blind, high-quality clinical randomized controlled trials are still needed in the future to further confirm the results of this research.

Project description:BackgroundNon-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques and mirror therapy (MT) are promising rehabilitation measures for stroke. While the combination of MT and NIBS has been employed for post-stroke upper limb motor functional rehabilitation, its effectiveness has not been examined.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of combined MT and NIBS in the recovery of upper limb motor function in stroke patients.MethodsThe search was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Science Direct, CNKI, WANFANG and VIP until December 2021. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing MT or NIBS alone with the combination of NIBS and MT in improving upper extremity motor recovery after stroke were selected. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate the mean differences (MD) or the standard mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with random-effect models. Subgroup analyses were also conducted according to the types of control group, the types of NIBS, stimulation timing and phase poststroke.ResultsA total of 12 articles, including 17 studies with 628 patients, were reviewed in the meta-analysis. In comparison with MT or NIBS alone, the combined group significantly improved body structure and function (MD = 5.97; 95% CI: 5.01-6.93; P < 0.05), activity levels (SMD = 0.82; 95% CI 0.61-1.02; P < 0.05). For cortical excitability, the motor evoked potential cortical latency (SMD = -1.05; 95% CI:-1.57--0.52; P < 0.05) and the central motor conduction time (SMD=-1.31 95% CI:-2.02--0.61; P < 0.05) of the combined group were significantly shortened. A non-significant homogeneous summary effect size was found for MEP amplitude (SMD = 0.47; 95%CI = -0.29 to 1.23; P = 0.23). Subgroup analysis showed that there is an interaction between the stimulation sequence and the combined treatment effect.ConclusionIn this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, in comparison to the control groups, MT combined with NIBS promoted the recovery of upper extremity motor function after stroke, which was reflected in the analysis of body structure and function, activity levels, and cortical excitability.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022304455.

Project description:IntroductionNon-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) with speech therapy might improve recovery from post-stroke aphasia. This three-armed sham-controlled blinded prospective proof-of-concept study tested 1 Hz subthreshold repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and 2-mA cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) on the right pars triangularis in subacute post-stroke aphasia.Patients and methodsSixty-three patients with left middle cerebral artery infarcts were recruited in five hospitals (Canada/United States/Germany, 01-2014/03-2018) and randomized to receive rTMS (N = 20), ctDCS (N = 24) or sham stimulation (N = 19) with ST for 10 days. Primary outcome variables were Z-score changes in naming, semantic fluency and comprehension tests and adverse event frequency. Secondary outcome variable was the percent change in the Unified Aphasia Score. Intention-to-treat analyses tested between-group effects at days 1 and 30 post-treatment with a pre-planned subgroup analysis for lesion location (affecting Broca's area or not).ResultsNaming was significantly improved by rTMS (median = 1.91/interquartile range = 0.77/p = .01) at 30 days versus ctDCS (median = 1.11/interquartile range = 1.51) and sham stimulation (median = 1.02/interquartile range = 1.71). All other primary results were non-significant. The rTMS effect was driven by the patient subgroup with intact Broca's area where NIBS tended to improve UnAS (median = 33.2%/interquartile range = 46.7%/p = .062) versus sham stimulation (median = 12.5%/interquartile range = 7.9%) at day 30. Conversely, in patients with infarcted Broca's area, UnAS tended to improve more with sham stimulation (median = 75.0%/interquartile range = 86.9%/p = .053) versus NIBS (median = 12.7%/interquartile range = 31.7).Conclusion: We found a delayed positive effect of low-frequency rTMS targeting the right pars triangularis on the recovery of naming performance in subacute post-stroke aphasia. This intervention may be beneficial only in patients with morphologically intact Broca's area.

Project description:Dysphagia is one of the most common symptoms in patients after stroke onset, which has multiple unfavorable effects on quality of life and functional recovery. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation that is widely used to improve deglutition function. Recently, some studies have confirmed that tDCS enhances deglutition function after stroke. However, the number of evaluation indexes used in those studies was small, and the number of trials included was limited. Most importantly, the optimal stimulation protocol is still uncertain and the safety of tDCS has not been reviewed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address these shortcomings.MethodsSeven databases were searched entirely, including Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed), Wan-fang database, and the Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP) from inception to 31 December 2021. Two reviewers independently evaluated the eligibility of retrieved data according to the selection criteria and assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Outcomes, measures, and indicators used in this study included the dysphagia outcome and severity scale (DOSS), modified Mann assessment of swallowing ability (MMASA), functional oral intake scale (FOIS), functional dysphagia scale (FDS), and Kubota's water-drinking test (KWDT). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the intervention effect more specifically.ResultsFifteen trials with a total of 787 participants (394 subjects in the tDCS groups were treated with true tDCS, and 393 subjects in the control groups were wait-listed or treated with sham tDCS) involving tDCS for dysphagia after stroke and were included in the meta-analysis. Results of this meta-analysis confirmed that tDCS had a positive effect on post-stroke dysphagia. Subgroup analyses revealed that bilateral and high-intensity stimulation with tDCS had a more significant impact on post-stroke dysphagia. Furthermore, no adverse events occurred during the application of tDCS for post-stroke dysphagia.ConclusiontDCS can promote the recovery of deglutition function in patients with dysphagia after stroke. In addition, bilateral stimulation and high-intensity stimulation may have better effects. However, the safety evidence for tDCS and post-stroke dysphagia is insufficient.

Dataset Information

Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Publications

Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets