Dataset Information

Does Cathodal vs. Sham Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over Contralesional Motor Cortex Enhance Upper Limb Motor Recovery Post-stroke? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background: During recovery from stroke, the contralesional motor cortex (M1) may undergo maladaptive changes that contribute to impaired interhemispheric inhibition (IHI). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with the cathode over contralesional M1 may inhibit this maladaptive plasticity, normalize IHI, and enhance motor recovery. Objective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate available evidence to determine whether cathodal tDCS on contralesional M1 enhances motor re-learning or recovery post-stroke more than sham tDCS. Methods: We searched OVID Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for participants with stroke (>1 week post-onset) with motor impairment and who received cathodal or sham tDCS to contralesional M1 for one or more sessions. The outcomes included a change in any clinically validated assessment of physical function, activity, or participation, or a change in a movement performance variable (e.g., time, accuracy). A meta-analysis was performed by pooling five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparing the change in Fugl-Meyer upper extremity scores between cathodal and sham tDCS groups. Results: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Qualitatively, four out of five cross-over design studies and three out of six RCTs reported a significant effect of cathodal vs. sham tDCS. In the quantitative synthesis, cathodal tDCS (n = 65) did not significantly reduce motor impairment compared to sham tDCS (n = 67; standardized mean difference = 0.33, z = 1.79, p = 0.07) with a little observed heterogeneity (I ² = 5%). Conclusions: The effects of cathodal tDCS to contralesional M1 on motor recovery are small and consistent. There may be sub-populations that may respond to this approach; however, further research with larger cohorts is required.

SUBMITTER: Chen JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8083132 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has the potential to improve upper limb motor outcomes after stroke. According to the assumption of interhemispheric inhibition, excessive inhibition from the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere to the motor cortex of the affected hemisphere may worsen upper limb motor recovery after stroke. We evaluated the effects of active cathodal tDCS of the primary motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere (ctDCSM1UH) compared to sham, in subjects within 72 hours to 6 weeks post ischemic stroke. Cathodal tDCS was intended to inhibit the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere and hence decrease the inhibition from the unaffected to the affected hemisphere and enhance motor recovery. We hypothesized that motor recovery would be greater in the active than in the sham group. In addition, greater motor recovery in the active group might be associated with bigger improvements in measures in activity and participation in the active than in the sham group. We also explored, for the first time, changes in cognition and sleep after ctDCSM1UH. Thirty subjects were randomized to six sessions of either active or sham ctDCSM1UH as add-on interventions to rehabilitation. The NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke (FMA), Barthel Index (BI), Stroke Impact Scale (SIS), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were assessed before, after treatment, and three months later. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis, there were significant GROUP∗TIME interactions reflecting stronger gains in the sham group for scores in NIHSS, FMA, BI, MoCA, and four SIS domains. At three months post intervention, the sham group improved significantly compared to posttreatment in FMA, NIHSS, BI, and three SIS domains while no significant changes occurred in the active group. Also at three months, NIHSS improved significantly in the sham group and worsened significantly in the active group. FMA scores at baseline were higher in the active than in the sham group. After adjustment of analysis according to baseline scores, the between-group differences in FMA changes were no longer statistically significant. Finally, none of the between-group differences in changes in outcomes after treatment were considered clinically relevant. In conclusion, active CtDCSM1UH did not have beneficial effects, compared to sham. These results were consistent with other studies that applied comparable tDCS intensities/current densities or treated subjects with severe upper limb motor impairments during the first weeks post stroke. Dose-finding studies early after stroke are necessary before planning larger clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundDespite improvements in acute stroke therapies and rehabilitation strategies, many stroke patients are left with long-term upper limb motor impairment. We assessed whether an inhibitory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment paradigm started within 3 weeks after stroke onset promotes upper limb motor recovery.MethodsWe performed a single-center randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial. Patients with ischemic stroke or intracerebral hemorrhage and unilateral upper limb motor impairment were randomized to 10 daily sessions of active or sham continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) of the contralesional primary motor cortex combined with standard upper limb therapy, started within 3 weeks after stroke onset. The primary outcome was the change in the Action Research Arm Test score from baseline (pretreatment) at 3 months after stroke. Secondary outcomes included the score on the modified Rankin Scale at 3 months and the length of stay at the rehabilitation center. Statistical analyses were performed using mixed models for repeated measures.ResultsWe enrolled 60 patients between April 2017 and February 2021, of whom 29 were randomized to active cTBS and 31 to sham cTBS. One patient randomized to active cTBS withdrew consent before the intervention and was excluded from the analyses. The mean difference in the change in Action Research Arm Test score from baseline at 3 months poststroke was 9.6 points ([95% CI, 1.2-17.9]; P=0.0244) in favor of active cTBS. Active cTBS was associated with better scores on the modified Rankin Scale at 3 months (OR, 0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.8]; P=0.0225) and with an 18 days shorter length of stay at the rehabilitation center than sham cTBS ([95% CI, 0.0-36.4]; P=0.0494). There were no serious adverse events.ConclusionsTen daily sessions of cTBS of the contralesional primary motor cortex combined with upper limb training, started within 3 weeks after stroke onset, promote recovery of the upper limb, reduce disability and dependence and leads to earlier discharge from the rehabilitation center.RegistrationURL: https://trialsearch.who.int/; Unique identifier: NTR6133.

Project description:BackgroundThe recovery of upper extremity motor impairment after stroke remains a challenging task. The clinical effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which is believed to aid in the recovery process, is still uncertain.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in Medline (Ovid), Cochrane and Embase electronic databases from March 28, 2014, to March 28, 2023. The inclusion criteria consisted of randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of rTMS on the recovery of upper limb motor impairment among stroke patients. Various measurements, including the Fugl Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity Scale (FMA-UE), Brunnstrom recovery stage, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Barthel index, were evaluated both before and after the intervention.ResultsNineteen articles with 865 patients were included. When considering only the rTMS parameters, both inhibitory and excitatory rTMS improved FMA-UE (MD = 1.87, 95% CI = [0.88]-[2.86], p < 0.001) and Barthel index (MD = 9.73, 95% CI = [4.57]-[14.89], p < 0.001). When considering only the severity of upper limb hemiplegia, both less severe (MD = 1.56, 95% CI = [0.64]-[2.49], p < 0.001) and severe (MD = 2.05, 95% CI = [1.09]-[3.00], p < 0.001) hemiplegia benefited from rTMS based on FMA-UE. However, when considering the rTMS parameters, severity of hemiplegia and stroke stages simultaneously, inhibitory rTMS was found to be significantly effective for less severe hemiplegia in the acute and subacute phases (MD = 4.55, 95% CI = [2.49]-[6.60], p < 0.001), but not in the chronic phase based on FMA-UE. For severe hemiplegia, inhibitory rTMS was not significantly effective in the acute and subacute phases, but significantly effective in the chronic phase (MD = 2.10, 95% CI = [0.75]-[3.45], p = 0.002) based on FMA-UE. Excitatory rTMS was found to be significantly effective for less severe hemiplegia in the acute and subacute phases (MD = 1.93, 95% CI = [0.58]-[3.28], p = 0.005) based on FMA-UE. The improvements in Brunnstrom recovery stage and ARAT need further research.ConclusionThe effectiveness of rTMS depends on its parameters, severity of hemiplegia, and stroke stages. It is important to consider all these factors together, as any single grouping method is incomplete.

Project description:BackgroundLower socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with higher mortality rates and the likelihood of receiving less evidence-based treatment after stroke. In contrast, little is known about the impact of SES on recovery after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of SES on long-term recovery after stroke.Patients and methodsIn a prospective, observational, multicentre study, inpatients were recruited towards the end of rehabilitation. The 12-month follow-up focussed on upper limb motor recovery, measured by the Fugl-Meyer score. A clinically relevant improvement of ≥5.25 points was considered recovery. Patient-centric measures such as the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Health (PROMIS-10 PH) provided secondary outcomes. Information on schooling, vocational training, income and occupational status pre-stroke entered a multidimensional SES index. Multivariate logistic regression models calculating odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were applied. SES was added to an initial model including age, sex and baseline neurological deficit. Additional exploratory analyses examined the association between SES and outpatient treatment.ResultsOne hundred and seventy-six patients were enrolled of whom 98 had SES and long-term recovery data. Model comparisons showed the SES-model superior to the initial model (Akaike information criterion (AIC): 123 vs. 120, Pseudo R2: 0.09 vs. 0.13). The likelihood of motor recovery (OR = 17.12, 95%CI = 1.31; 224.18) and PROMIS-10 PH improvement (OR = 20.76, 95%CI = 1.28; 337.11) were significantly increased with higher SES, along with more frequent use of outpatient therapy (p = .02).ConclusionsHigher pre-stroke SES is associated with better long-term recovery after discharge from rehabilitation. Understanding these factors can improve outpatient long-term stroke care and lead to better recovery.KEY MESSAGEHigher pre-stroke socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with better long-term recovery after discharge from rehabilitation both in terms of motor function and self-reported health status.Higher SES is associated with significantly higher utilization of outpatient therapies.Discharge management of rehabilitation clinics should identify and address socioeconomic factors in order to detect individual needs and to improve outpatient recovery. Article registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT04119479.

Project description:IntroductionUpper extremity motor impairment is one of the major sequelae of stroke, resulting in limitations of activities of daily living. Recently, contralesional cortical activation has been reported to be important for motor recovery in stroke patients with severe upper extremity hemiparesis due to the extensive corticospinal tract involvement. We therefore designed this study to investigate the effects of contralesional anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which induces cortical activation, in stroke patients with severe upper extremity motor impairment.Methods and analysisWe will recruit patients with subacute stroke (<3 months after onset) with unilateral upper extremity weakness who meet the following criteria: Shoulder Abduction and Finger Extension (SAFE) score below 8, Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity (FMA-UE) score ≤25, and absent motor evoked potential (MEP) response on the affected extensor carpi radialis muscle. Subjects will be randomly allocated to either the intervention (n = 18) or the control group (n = 18). The intervention group will undergo 10 sessions of robotic arm rehabilitation with simultaneous anodal tDCS over the contralesional premotor area, whereas the control group will receive sham tDCS during the same sessions. One daily session consists of 25 minutes.The primary outcome measure of this study is the Fugl-Meyer Assessment score of the upper extremity; the secondary outcome measures are the Korean version of the Modified Barthel Index, the Brunnstrom stage of the affected arm and hand, the Box and Block Test, the Modified Ashworth Scale, the Manual Muscle Power Test, and the patient's encephalographic laterality index.DiscussionFindings of this study will help to establish an individualized tDCS protocol according to the stroke severity and to find out the EEG parameters to predict the better recovery in subacute stroke patients with severe upper extremity hemiparesis.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Institutional Review Board (IRB No. B-1806-475-006) and will be carried out in accordance with the approved guidelines. The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Dataset Information

Does Cathodal vs. Sham Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over Contralesional Motor Cortex Enhance Upper Limb Motor Recovery Post-stroke? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets