The Efficacy and Safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cerebellar Ataxia: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chen TX
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7864859 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC9102865 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, can manage cerebellar ataxia (CA) by suppressing cerebral cortical excitability. Hence, this study aimed to summarize the efficacy and safety of rTMS for CA patients by meta-analysis.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies published till 20 May 2023. Weighted mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the effect of rTMS treatment. Additionally, the quality of the included studies and the risk of bias were evaluated using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.ResultsOverall, eight studies involving 278 CA patients were included in this meta-analysis. rTMS could significantly improve the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) (MD: -2.00; 95% CI: -3.97 to -0.02, p = 0.05), International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS) (MD: -3.96; 95% CI: -5.51 to -2.40, p < 0.00001), Timed Up-and-Go test (TUG) (MD: -1.54; 95% CI: -2.24 to -0.84, p < 0.0001), 10-m walk test (10 MWT) (MD10-m steps: -2.44; 95% CI: -4.14 to -0.73, p = 0.005), and Berg Balance Scale (BBS) (MD: 2.59; 95% CI: 1.15-4.03, p = 0.0004) as compared to sham stimulation. Active rTMS was not significantly different from sham rTMS in changing the duration (MD10-m time: -1.29; 95% CI: -7.98 to 5.41, p = 0.71). No severe adverse events were observed in both sham stimulation and active rTMS groups.ConclusionThis meta-analysis provides limited evidence that rTMS may be beneficial in treating CA patients. However, these findings should be treated with caution due to the limitations of the smaller sample size and the inconsistent approach and target of rTMS treatment. Therefore, more large-scale RCTs are required to further validate our analytical findings.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=295726, identifier: CRD42022295726.
| S-EPMC10360185 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation in improving cerebellar ataxia.Data sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Springer, Science Direct, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and the China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) were searched until 2022.Review methodsTrials with transcranial magnetic stimulation on the effects on cerebellar ataxia were included, and the effect size was evaluated using the standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsEight studies comprising 272 participants, published between 2014 and 2022, were included. The results revealed that the effect of TMS on patients with cerebellar ataxia as assessed by the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICRAS), the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test was statistically significant (P < 0.01) with low heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 4, 27, 0, and 0% respectively).ConclusionThe effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation in improving cerebellar ataxia in the affected patients are significant. TMS targeting the cerebellar structures can induce changes in the excitability of the cerebellar-thalamus-cortical pathways; thus, it is necessary to carry out large-scale research with good design and high quality in the future.
| S-EPMC9911422 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Repeated sessions of cerebellar anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been suggested to modulate cerebellar-motor cortex (M1) connectivity and decrease ataxia severity. However, therapeutic trials involving etiologically homogeneous groups of ataxia patients are lacking. The objective of this study was to investigate if a two-week regimen of daily cerebellar tDCS sessions diminishes ataxia and non-motor symptom severity and alters cerebellar-M1 connectivity in individuals with spinocerebellar ataxia type 3 (SCA3). We conducted a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial in which twenty mildly to moderately affected SCA3 patients received ten sessions of real or sham cerebellar tDCS (i.e., five days per week for two consecutive weeks). Effects were evaluated after two weeks, three months, six months, and twelve months. Change in Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) score after two weeks was defined as the primary endpoint. Static posturography, SCA Functional Index tests, various patient-reported outcome measures, the cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome scale, and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation to examine cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI) served as secondary endpoints. Absolute change in SARA score did not differ between both trial arms at any of the time points. We observed significant short-term improvements in several motor, cognitive, and patient-reported outcomes after the last stimulation session in both groups but no treatment effects in favor of real tDCS. Nonetheless, some of the patients in the intervention arm showed a sustained reduction in SARA score lasting six or even twelve months, indicating interindividual variability in treatment response. CBI, which reflects the functional integrity of the cerebellothalamocortical tract, remained unchanged after ten tDCS sessions. Albeit exploratory, there was some indication for between-group differences in SARA speech score after six and twelve months and in the number of extracerebellar signs after three and six months. Taken together, our study does not provide evidence that a two-week treatment with daily cerebellar tDCS sessions reduces ataxia severity or restores cerebellar-M1 connectivity in early-to-middle-stage SCA3 patients at the group level. In order to potentially increase therapeutic efficacy, further research is warranted to identify individual predictors of symptomatic improvement.
| S-EPMC9059914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) have been described as promising alternatives to treat different pain syndromes. This study evaluated the effects of TMS and tDCS in the treatment of chronic orofacial pain, through a systematic review.MethodsAn electronic search was performed in major databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, BBO, Open Gray and CINAHL. The eligibility criteria comprised randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that applied TMS or tDCS to treat chronic orofacial pain. The variables analyzed were pain, functional limitation, quality of life, tolerance to treatment, somatosensory changes, and adverse effects. The risk of bias was assessed through the Cochrane Collaboration tool, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated through GRADE. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018090774).ResultsThe electronic search resulted in 636 studies. Thereafter, the eligibility criteria were applied and the duplicates removed, resulting in eight RCTs (four TMS and four tDCS). The findings of these studies suggest that rTMS applied to the Motor cortex (M1), the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) provide adequate orofacial pain relief. Two studies reported significant pain improvement with tDCS applied over M1 while the other two failed to demonstrate significant effects compared to placebo.ConclusionsrTMS, applied to M1, DLPFC or S2, is a promising approach for the treatment of chronic orofacial pain. Moreover, tDCS targeting M1 seems to be also effective in chronic orofacial pain treatment. The included studies used a wide variety of therapeutic protocols. In addition, most of them used small sample sizes, with a high risk of biases in their methodologies, thus producing a low quality of evidence. The results indicate that further research should be carried out with caution and with better-standardized therapeutic protocols.
| S-EPMC6695170 | biostudies-literature
Project description:While previous research using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) suggest that cerebellum (CB) influences the neuroplastic response of primary motor cortex (M1), the role of different indirect (I) wave inputs in M1 mediating this interaction remains unclear. The aim of this study was therefore to assess how CB influences neuroplasticity of early and late I-wave circuits. 22 young adults (22 ± 2.7 years) participated in 3 sessions in which I-wave periodicity repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (iTMS) was applied over M1 during concurrent application of cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation over CB (tDCSCB). In each session, iTMS either targeted early I-waves (1.5 ms interval; iTMS1.5), late I-waves (4.5 ms interval; iTMS4.5), or had no effect (variable interval; iTMSSham). Changes due to the intervention were examined with motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude using TMS protocols measuring corticospinal excitability (MEP1mV) and the strength of CB-M1 connections (CBI). In addition, we indexed I-wave activity using short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF) and low-intensity single-pulse TMS applied with posterior-anterior (MEPPA) and anterior-posterior (MEPAP) current directions. Following both active iTMS sessions, there was no change in MEP1mV, CBI or SICF (all P > 0.05), suggesting that tDCSCB broadly disrupted the excitatory response that is normally seen following iTMS. However, although MEPAP also failed to facilitate after the intervention (P > 0.05), MEPPA potentiated following both active iTMS sessions (both P < 0.05). This differential response between current directions could indicate a selective effect of CB on AP-sensitive circuits.
| S-EPMC9275832 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Progressive cerebellar ataxia is a neurodegenerative disorder without effective treatment options that seriously hinders quality of life. Previously, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been demonstrated to benefit cerebellar functions (including improved motor control, learning and emotional processing) in healthy individuals and patients with neurological disorders. While tDCS is an emerging therapy, multiple daily sessions are needed for optimal clinical benefit. This case study tests the symptomatic benefit of remotely supervised tDCS (RS-tDCS) for a patient with cerebellar ataxia. METHODS:We report a case of a 71-year-old female patient with progressive cerebellar ataxia, who presented with unsteady gait and balance impairment, treated with tDCS. tDCS was administered using our RS-tDCS protocol and was completed daily in the patient's home (Monday - Friday) with the help of a trained study technician. tDCS was paired with 20 min of simultaneous cognitive training, followed by 20 min of physical exercises directed by a physical therapist. Stimulation consisted of 20 min of 2.5 mA direct current targeting the cerebellum via an anodal electrode and a cathodal electrode placed over the right shoulder. The patient completed baseline and treatment end visits with neurological, cognitive, and motor (Lafayette Grooved Pegboard Test, 25 ft walk test and Timed Up and Go Test) assessments. RESULTS:The patient successfully completed sixty tDCS sessions, 59 of which were administered remotely at the patient's home with the use of real time supervision as enabled by video conferencing. Mild improvement was observed in the patient's gait with a 7% improvement in walking speed, which she completed without a walking-aid at treatment end, which was in stark contrast to her baseline assessment. Improvements were also achieved in manual dexterity, with an increase in pegboard scores bilaterally compared to baseline. CONCLUSIONS:Results from this case report suggest that consecutively administered tDCS treatments paired with cognitive and physical exercise hold promise for improving balance, gait, and manual dexterity in patients with progressive ataxia. Remotely supervised tDCS provides home access to enable the administration over an extended period. Further controlled study in a large group of those with cerebellar ataxia is needed to replicate these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03049969 . Registered 10 February 2017- Retrospectively registered.
| S-EPMC6425598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising method for altering cortical excitability with clinical implications. It has been increasingly used in neurodevelopmental disorders, especially attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but its efficacy (based on effect size calculations), safety, and stimulation parameters have not been systematically examined. In this systematic review, we aimed to (1) explore the effectiveness of tDCS on the clinical symptoms and neuropsychological deficits of ADHD patients, (2) evaluate the safety of tDCS application, especially in children with ADHD, (3) model the electrical field intensity in the target regions based on the commonly-applied and effective versus less-effective protocols, and (4) discuss and propose advanced tDCS parameters. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach, a literature search identified 14 empirical experiments investigating tDCS effects in ADHD. Partial improving effects of tDCS on cognitive deficits (response inhibition, working memory, attention, and cognitive flexibility) or clinical symptoms (e.g., impulsivity and inattention) are reported in 10 studies. No serious adverse effects are reported in 747 sessions of tDCS. The left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex are the regions most often targeted, and anodal tDCS the protocol most often applied. An intensity of 2 mA induced stronger electrical fields than 1 mA in adults with ADHD and was associated with significant behavioral changes. In ADHD children, however, the electrical field induced by 1 mA, which is likely larger than the electrical field induced by 1 mA in adults due to the smaller head size of children, was sufficient to result in significant behavioral change. Overall, tDCS seems to be a promising method for improving ADHD deficits. However, the clinical utility of tDCS in ADHD cannot yet be concluded and requires further systematic investigation in larger sample sizes. Cortical regions involved in ADHD pathophysiology, stimulation parameters (e.g. intensity, duration, polarity, and electrode size), and types of symptom/deficit are potential determinants of tDCS efficacy in ADHD. Developmental aspects of tDCS in childhood ADHD should be considered as well.
| S-EPMC7532240 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This review updates and consolidates evidence on the safety of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS). Safety is here operationally defined by, and limited to, the absence of evidence for a Serious Adverse Effect, the criteria for which are rigorously defined. This review adopts an evidence-based approach, based on an aggregation of experience from human trials, taking care not to confuse speculation on potential hazards or lack of data to refute such speculation with evidence for risk. Safety data from animal tests for tissue damage are reviewed with systematic consideration of translation to humans. Arbitrary safety considerations are avoided. Computational models are used to relate dose to brain exposure in humans and animals. We review relevant dose-response curves and dose metrics (e.g. current, duration, current density, charge, charge density) for meaningful safety standards. Special consideration is given to theoretically vulnerable populations including children and the elderly, subjects with mood disorders, epilepsy, stroke, implants, and home users. Evidence from relevant animal models indicates that brain injury by Direct Current Stimulation (DCS) occurs at predicted brain current densities (6.3-13 A/m(2)) that are over an order of magnitude above those produced by conventional tDCS. To date, the use of conventional tDCS protocols in human trials (≤40 min, ≤4 milliamperes, ≤7.2 Coulombs) has not produced any reports of a Serious Adverse Effect or irreversible injury across over 33,200 sessions and 1000 subjects with repeated sessions. This includes a wide variety of subjects, including persons from potentially vulnerable populations.
| S-EPMC5007190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:People with Parkinson's disease (PwPD) often experience gait and balance problems that substantially impact their quality of life. Pharmacological, surgical, and rehabilitative treatments have limited effectiveness and many PwPD continue to experience gait and balance impairment. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may represent a viable therapeutic adjunct. The effects of lower intensity tDCS (2 mA) over frontal brain areas, in unilateral and bilateral montages, has previously been explored; however, the effects of lower and higher intensity cerebellar tDCS (2 mA and 4 mA, respectively) on gait and balance has not been investigated. Seven PwPD underwent five cerebellar tDCS conditions (sham, unilateral 2 mA, bilateral 2 mA, unilateral 4 mA, and bilateral 4 mA) for 20 min. After a 10 min rest, gait and balance were tested. The results indicated that the bilateral 4 mA cerebellar tDCS condition had a significantly higher Berg Balance Scale score compared to sham. This study provides preliminary evidence that a single session of tDCS over the cerebellum, using a bilateral configuration at a higher intensity (4 mA), significantly improved balance performance. This intensity and cerebellar configuration warrants future investigation in larger samples and over repeated sessions.
| S-EPMC7071613 | biostudies-literature