Dataset Information

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation on Dysphagia after Stroke

ABSTRACT:

Background

Dysphagia 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.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the effect of NIBS on dysphagia after stroke and compare the effects of two different NIBS.

Methods

Randomized 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).

Results

Ultimately, 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).

Conclusion

Existing 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.

SUBMITTER: Li L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8580697 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Normal brain functioning is presumed to depend upon interacting regions within large-scale neuronal networks. Increasing evidence exists that interictal network alterations in focal epilepsy are associated with cognitive and behavioral deficits. Nevertheless, the reported network alterations are inconclusive and prone to low statistical power due to small sample sizes as well as modest effect sizes. We therefore systematically reviewed the existing literature and conducted a meta-analysis to characterize the changes in whole-brain interictal focal epilepsy networks at sufficient power levels. We focused on the two most commonly used metrics in whole-brain networks: average path length and average clustering coefficient. Twelve studies were included that reported whole-brain network average path length and average clustering coefficient characteristics in patients and controls. The overall group difference, quantified as the standardized mean average path length difference between epilepsy and control groups, corresponded to a significantly increased average path length of 0.29 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12 to 0.45, p?=?0.0007) in the epilepsy group. This suggests a less integrated interictal whole-brain network. Similarly, a significantly increased standardized mean average clustering coefficient of 0.35 (CI: 0.05 to 0.65, p?=?0.02) was found in the epilepsy group in comparison with controls, pointing towards a more segregated interictal network. Sub-analyses revealed similar results for functional and structural networks in terms of effect size and directionality for both metrics. In addition, we found individual network studies to be prone to low power due to the relatively small group differences in average path length and average clustering coefficient in combination with small sample sizes. The pooled network characteristics support the hypothesis that focal epilepsy has widespread detrimental effects, that is, reduced integration and increased segregation, on whole brain interictal network organization, which may relate to the co-morbid cognitive and behavioral impairments often reported in patients with focal epilepsy.

Project description:Objective To compare the efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with atrial fibrillation.Design Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and cost effectiveness analysis. Data sources Medline, PreMedline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Published randomised trials evaluating the use of a DOAC, vitamin K antagonist, or antiplatelet drug for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.Results 23 randomised trials involving 94?656 patients were analysed: 13 compared a DOAC with warfarin dosed to achieve a target INR of 2.0-3.0. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily (odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.94), dabigatran 150 mg twice daily (0.65, 0.52 to 0.81), edoxaban 60 mg once daily (0.86, 0.74 to 1.01), and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (0.88, 0.74 to 1.03) reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared with warfarin. The risk of stroke or systemic embolism was higher with edoxaban 60 mg once daily (1.33, 1.02 to 1.75) and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (1.35, 1.03 to 1.78) than with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily. The risk of all-cause mortality was lower with all DOACs than with warfarin. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily (0.71, 0.61 to 0.81), dabigatran 110 mg twice daily (0.80, 0.69 to 0.93), edoxaban 30 mg once daily (0.46, 0.40 to 0.54), and edoxaban 60 mg once daily (0.78, 0.69 to 0.90) reduced the risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin. The risk of major bleeding was higher with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily than apixaban 5 mg twice daily (1.33, 1.09 to 1.62), rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily than apixaban 5 mg twice daily (1.45, 1.19 to 1.78), and rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily than edoxaban 60 mg once daily (1.31, 1.07 to 1.59). The risk of intracranial bleeding was substantially lower for most DOACs compared with warfarin, whereas the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was higher with some DOACs than warfarin. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily was ranked the highest for most outcomes, and was cost effective compared with warfarin.Conclusions The network meta-analysis informs the choice of DOACs for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Several DOACs are of net benefit compared with warfarin. A trial directly comparing DOACs would overcome the need for indirect comparisons to be made through network meta-analysis.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD 42013005324.