Dataset Information

Corticocortical paired associative stimulation for treating motor dysfunction after stroke: study protocol for a randomised sham-controlled double-blind clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Stroke survivors can have a high disability rate with low quality of daily life, resulting in a heavy burden on family and society. Transcranial magnetic stimulation has been widely applied to brain injury repair, neurological disease treatment, cognition and emotion regulation and so on. However, there is still much to be desired in the theories of using these neuromodulation techniques to treat stroke-caused hemiplegia. It is generally recognised that synaptic plasticity is an important basis for functional repair after brain injury. This study protocol aims to examine the corticocortical paired associative stimulation (ccPAS) for inducing synaptic plasticity to rescue the paralysed after stroke.

Methods and analysis

The current study is designed as a 14-week double-blind randomised sham-controlled clinical trial, composed of 2-week intervention and 12-week follow-up. For the study, 42 patients who had a stroke aged 40-70 will be recruited, who are randomly assigned either to the ccPAS intervention group, or to the control group at a 1:1 ratio, hence an equal number each. In the intervention group, ccPAS is practised in conjunction with the conventional rehabilitation treatment, and in the control group, the conventional rehabilitation treatment is administered with sham stimulation. A total of 10 interventions will be made, 5 times a week for 2 weeks. The same assessors are supposed to evaluate the participants' motor function at four time points of the baseline (before 10 interventions), treatment ending (after 10 interventions), and two intervals of follow-up (1 and 3 months later, respectively). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity is used for the primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes include changes in the assessment of Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), electroencephalogram (EEG) and functional MRI data. The adverse events are to be recorded throughout the study.

Ethics and dissemination

This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Yueyang Hospital. All ethical work was performed in accordance with the Helsinki declaration. Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Study findings will be disseminated in the printed media.

Trial registration number

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000036685.

SUBMITTER: Duan YJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8762140 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine whether neurophysiological mechanisms indicating cortical excitability, long-term potentiation (LTP)-like plasticity, GABAergic and glutamatergic function are altered in patients with anti-N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis and whether they can be helpful as markers of diagnostic assessment, disease progression, and potentially therapy response. METHODS:Neurophysiological characterizations of patients with NMDAR encephalitis (n = 34, mean age: 28 ± 11 years; 30 females) and age/gender-matched healthy controls (n = 27, 28.5 ± 10 years; 25 females) were performed using transcranial magnetic stimulation-derived protocols including resting motor threshold, recruitment curve, intracortical facilitation, short intracortical inhibition, and cortical silent period. Paired associative stimulation (PAS) was applied to assess LTP-like mechanisms which are mediated through NMDAR. Moreover, resting state functional connectivity was determined using functional magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS:PAS-induced plasticity differed significantly between groups (P = 0.0056). Cortical excitability, as assessed via motor-evoked potentials after PAS, decreased in patients, whereas it increased in controls indicating malfunctioning of NMDAR in encephalitis patients. Lower PAS-induced plasticity significantly correlated with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) (r = -0.41; P = 0.0031) and was correlated with lower functional connectivity within the motor network in NMDAR encephalitis patients (P < 0.001, uncorrected). Other neurophysiological parameters were not significantly different between groups. Follow-up assessments were available in six patients and demonstrated parallel improvement of PAS-induced plasticity and mRS. INTERPRETATION:Assessment of PAS-induced plasticity may help to determine NMDAR dysfunction and disease severity in NMDAR encephalitis, and might even aid as a sensitive, noninvasive, and well-tolerated "electrophysiological biomarker" to monitor therapy response in the future. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier: NCT01865578.

Project description:Advances in our understanding of neural plasticity have prompted the emergence of neuromodulatory interventions, which modulate corticomotor excitability (CME) and hold potential for accelerating stroke recovery. Endogenous paired associative stimulation (ePAS) involves the repeated pairing of a single pulse of peripheral electrical stimulation (PES) with endogenous movement-related cortical potentials (MRCPs), which are derived from electroencephalography. However, little is known about the optimal parameters for its delivery. A factorial design with repeated measures delivered four different versions of ePAS, in which PES intensities and movement type were manipulated. Linear mixed models were employed to assess interaction effects between PES intensity (suprathreshold (Hi) and motor threshold (Lo)) and movement type (Voluntary and Imagined) on CME. ePAS interventions significantly increased CME compared to control interventions, except in the case of Lo-Voluntary ePAS. There was an overall main effect for the Hi-Voluntary ePAS intervention immediately post-intervention (p = 0.002), with a sub-additive interaction effect at 30 min' post-intervention (p = 0.042). Hi-Imagined and Lo-Imagined ePAS significantly increased CME for 30 min post-intervention (p = 0.038 and p = 0.043 respectively). The effects of the two PES intensities were not significantly different. CME was significantly greater after performing imagined movements, compared to voluntary movements, with motor threshold PES (Lo) 15 min post-intervention (p = 0.012). This study supports previous research investigating Lo-Imagined ePAS and extends those findings by illustrating that ePAS interventions that deliver suprathreshold intensities during voluntary or imagined movements (Hi-Voluntary and Hi-Imagined) also increase CME. Importantly, our findings indicate that stimulation intensity and movement type interact in ePAS interventions. Factorial designs are an efficient way to explore the effects of manipulating the parameters of neuromodulatory interventions. Further research is required to ensure that these parameters are appropriately refined to maximise intervention efficacy for people with stroke and to support translation into clinical practice.

Project description:Paired associative stimulation is a relatively new non-invasive brain stimulation technique that combines transcranial magnetic stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation. The effects of paired associative stimulation on the excitability of the cerebral cortex can vary according to the time interval between the transcranial magnetic stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation. We established a model of cerebral ischemia in rats via transient middle cerebral artery occlusion. We administered paired associative stimulation with a frequency of 0.05 Hz 90 times over 4 weeks. We then evaluated spatial learning and memory using the Morris water maze. Changes in the cerebral ultra-structure and synaptic plasticity were assessed via transmission electron microscopy and a 64-channel multi-electrode array. We measured mRNA and protein expression levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor 1 in the hippocampus using a real-time polymerase chain reaction and western blot assay. Paired associative stimulation treatment significantly improved learning and memory in rats subjected to cerebral ischemia. The ultra-structures of synapses in the CA1 area of the hippocampus in rats subjected to cerebral ischemia were restored by paired associative stimulation. Long-term potentiation at synapses in the CA3 and CA1 regions of the hippocampus was enhanced as well. The protein and mRNA expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor 1 increased after paired associative stimulation treatment. These data indicate that paired associative stimulation can protect cognition after cerebral ischemia. The observed effect may be mediated by increases in the mRNA and protein expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor 1, and by enhanced synaptic plasticity in the CA1 area of the hippocampus. The animal experiments were approved by the Animal Ethics Committee of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, China (approval No. TJ-A20151102) on July 11, 2015.

Project description:BackgroundAt present, the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is limited to single-site interventions. We investigated whether dual-site frontoparietal stimulation delivered using cortical-cortical paired associative stimulation (ccPAS) had stronger clinical efficacy than single-site stimulation in patients with GAD.MethodsWe randomized 50 patients with GAD to 1 Hz rTMS (10 sessions) using 1 of the following protocols: single-site stimulation over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC; 1500 pulses per session); single-site stimulation over the right posterior parietal cortex (PPC; 1500 pulses per session); repetitive dual-site ccPAS (rds-ccPAS) over the right dlPFC and right PPC with 1500 pulses per session (rd-ccPAS-1500); or rds-ccPAS over the right dlPFC and right PPC with 750 pulses per session (rd-ccPAS-750). Both rds-ccPAS treatments used a between-site interval of 100 ms.ResultsClinical scores for anxiety, depression and insomnia were reduced in all 4 groups after treatment. We found greater improvements in anxiety symptoms in the rds-ccPAS-1500 group compared to the rds-ccPAS-750 and single-site groups. We found greater improvements in depression symptoms and insomnia in the rds-PAS-1500 group compared to the single-site groups. The rds-ccPAS-1500 group also showed significant or trend-level improvements in anxiety symptoms and insomnia at 10-day and 1-month followup. More patients responded to treatment with rds-ccPAS-1500 than with single-site stimulation. The between-group differences in response rates persisted to the 3-month follow-up. Treatment using rds-ccPAS with a between-site interval of 100 ms induced a more significant improvement than the between-site interval of 50 ms we evaluated in a previous study.LimitationsThese results need to be replicated in a larger sample using sham control and equal-pulse single-site stimulation.ConclusionFrontoparietal rds-ccPAS may be a better treatment option for GAD.

Project description:Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a well-established tool in probing cortical plasticity in vivo. Changes in corticomotor excitability can be induced using paired associative stimulation (PAS) protocol, in which TMS over the primary motor cortex is conditioned with an electrical peripheral nerve stimulation of the contralateral hand. PAS with an inter-stimulus interval of 25 ms induces long-term potentiation (LTP)-like effects in cortical excitability. However, the response to a PAS protocol tends to vary substantially across individuals. In this study, we used univariate and multivariate data-driven methods to investigate various previously proposed determinants of inter-individual variability in PAS efficacy, such as demographic, cognitive, clinical, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging measures. Forty-one right-handed participants, comprising 22 patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 19 healthy controls (HC), underwent the PAS protocol. Prior to stimulation, demographic, genetic, clinical, as well as structural and resting-state functional MRI data were acquired. The two groups did not differ in any of the variables, except by global cognitive status. Univariate analysis showed that only 61% of all participants were classified as PAS responders, irrespective of group membership. Higher PAS response was associated with lower TMS intensity and with higher resting-state connectivity within the sensorimotor network, but only in responders, as opposed to non-responders. We also found an overall positive correlation between PAS response and structural connectivity within the corticospinal tract, which did not differ between groups. A multivariate random forest (RF) model identified age, gender, education, IQ, global cognitive status, sleep quality, alertness, TMS intensity, genetic factors, and neuroimaging measures (functional and structural connectivity, gray matter (GM) volume, and cortical thickness as poor predictors of PAS response. The model resulted in low accuracy of the RF classifier (58%; 95% CI: 42 - 74%), with a higher relative importance of brain connectivity measures compared to the other variables. We conclude that PAS variability in our sample was not well explained by factors known to influence PAS efficacy, emphasizing the need for future replication studies.

Project description:Previous single-site neurostimulation experiments have unsuccessfully attempted to shift decision-making away from habitual control, a fast, inflexible cognitive strategy, towards goal-directed control, a flexible, though computationally expensive strategy. We employed a dual-target neurostimulation approach in 30 healthy participants, using cortico-cortical paired associative stimulation (ccPAS) to target two key nodes: lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) and intraparietal sulcus (IPS), to test whether decision-making can be artificially shifted from habitual toward goal-directed control. Participants received three active stimulations, delivered at least six days apart (each involving 100 paired pulses over the IPS and LPFC, varying the interstimulus interval): two interventional, time-relevant ccPAS (10 msec interval) and one control, non-time-relevant ccPAS (100 msec interval). Following stimulation, participants completed a sequential learning task, measuring goal-directed/habitual control, and a working memory task. IPS→LPFC ccPAS (stimulating IPS, then LPFC with a 10 msec interval) shifted decision-making from habitual toward goal-directed control, compared to control ccPAS. There was no effect of LPFC→IPS ccPAS, nor an effect of any PAS condition on working memory. Previous studies have shown ccPAS effects outside the motor domain targeting prefrontal regions on response inhibition, attentional bias, and alpha asymmetry. The present study measures the behavioural effects of parietal-prefrontal PAS, focusing on a highly complex decision-making task and working memory. If confirmed in larger studies, this would be the first instance of neurostimulation successfully shifting decision-making from habitual to goal-directed control, putatively via inducing long-term potentiation between the IPS and LPFC. However, we found no effect in the other direction (LPFC→IPS ccPAS), and no effect on working memory overall. PAS is a relatively new neuromodulatory technique in the cognitive arsenal, and this study could help guide future approaches in healthy and disordered decision-making.