Neurophysiological signatures of hand motor response to dual-transcranial direct current stimulation in subacute stroke: a TMS and MEG study

Dual-tDCS combined with sensorimotor training promotes upper limb function in subacute stroke patients: A randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Dual transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the bilateral primary somatosensory cortex (PSC) has potential benefits in stroke. In addition, compared with traditional rehabilitation training, sensorimotor training can significantly improve the sensorimotor function of patients. However, the efficacy of dual-tDCS combined with sensorimotor training in patients with subacute stroke is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether dual-tDCS may enhance the efficacy of sensorimotor training on the upper limb functions in patients with subacute stroke. In addition, this study aims to explore the potential clinical mechanism of this combination therapy.

METHODS

We randomized 52 individuals with first-ever, unilateral subcortical stroke into the experimental group (n = 26) and the control group (n = 26). Patients in the experimental group received 20 min of dual-tDCS over the PSC and 40 min of sensorimotor training each session, while patients in the control group received sham dual-tDCS. The treatment cycle was a 1-h session of therapy each day, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) subscale, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Box and Block test (BBT), Erasmus MC revised Nottingham sensory assessment scale (Em-NSA), Neurometer sensory nerve quantitative detector (CPT), the Barthel index (BI), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were used to assess upper limb function, activities of daily living (ADL), and mental health before and after the 4-week treatment period. In addition, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was used to explore potential clinical brain mechanisms.

RESULTS

Both groups showed significant improvement in all clinical scales (All p < 0.05) after treatment. Compared with sham-tDCS plus sensorimotor training, active dual-tDCS coupled with sensorimotor training can significantly improve the FMA-UE, ARAT, Em-NSA-Stereognosis, and CPT-2K Hz. In addition, dual-tDCS combined with sensorimotor training can significantly activate the left pre-Motor and supplementary motor cortex (PM-SMC) and enhance the functional connection between the left somatosensory association cortex (SAC) and RPM-SMC. Furthermore, the difference of FMA-UE in the experimental group was positively correlated with the functional connectivity of RPM-SMC-LSAC (r = 0.815, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Dual-tDCS over the PSC combined with sensorimotor training can improve upper limb sensory and motor dysfunction, enhance ADL, and alleviate depression and anxiety for subacute stroke patients. Our results indicated that RPM-SMC-LSAC may be potential therapeutic targets for dual-tDCS in upper limb rehabilitation on stroke.

Exploring the Prospects of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) as a Therapeutic Intervention for Post-Stroke Motor Recovery: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Stroke survivors often have motor impairments and related functional deficits. Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) is a rapidly evolving field that offers a wide range of capabilities for modulating brain function, and it is safe and inexpensive. It has the potential for widespread use for post-stroke motor recovery. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS), Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS), and Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS) are three recognized tES techniques that have gained substantial attention in recent years but have different mechanisms of action. tDCS has been widely used in stroke motor rehabilitation, while applications of tACS and tRNS are very limited. The tDCS protocols could vary significantly, and outcomes are heterogeneous.

PURPOSE

the current review attempted to explore the mechanisms underlying commonly employed tES techniques and evaluate their prospective advantages and challenges for their applications in motor recovery after stroke.

CONCLUSION

tDCS could depolarize and hyperpolarize the potentials of cortical motor neurons, while tACS and tRNS could target specific brain rhythms and entrain neural networks. Despite the extensive use of tDCS, the complexity of neural networks calls for more sophisticated modifications like tACS and tRNS.

Effect of optimized transcranial direct current stimulation on motor cortex activation in patients with sub-acute or chronic stroke: a study protocol for a single-blinded cross-over randomized control trial

Introduction

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown positive but inconsistent results in stroke rehabilitation. This could be attributed to inter-individual variations in brain characteristics and stroke lesions, which limit the use of a single tDCS protocol for all post-stroke patients. Optimizing the electrode location in tDCS for each individual using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to generate three-dimensional computer models and calculate the electric field (E-field) induced by tDCS at a specific target point in the primary motor cortex may help reduce these inconsistencies. In stroke rehabilitation, locating the optimal position that generates a high E-field in a target area can influence motor recovery. Therefore, this study was designed to determine the effect of personalized tDCS electrode positions on hand-knob activation in post-stroke patients.

Method

This is a crossover study with a sample size of 50 participants, who will be randomly assigned to one of six groups and will receive one session of either optimized-active, conventional-active, or sham tDCS, with 24 h between sessions. The tDCS parameters will be 1 mA (5 × 5 cm electrodes) for 20 min. The motor-evoked potential (MEP) will be recorded before and after each session over the target area (motor cortex hand-knob) and the MEP hotspot. The MEP amplitude at the target location will be the primary outcome.

Discussion

We hypothesize that the optimized-active tDCS session would show a greater increase in MEP amplitude over the target area in patients with subacute and chronic stroke than conventional and sham tDCS sessions.Clinical trial registration: https://cris.nih.go.kr, identifier KCT0007536.

Effect of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation on distal upper limb function and corticospinal tract excitability in a patient with subacute stroke: a case study

Introduction

Activation of the unaffected hemisphere contributes to motor function recovery post stroke in patients with severe upper limb motor paralysis. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used in stroke rehabilitation to increase the excitability of motor-related areas. tDCS has been reported to improve upper limb motor function; nonetheless, its effects on corticospinal tract excitability and muscle activity patterns during upper limb exercise remain unclear. Additionally, it is unclear whether simultaneously applied bihemispheric tDCS is more effective than anodal tDCS, which stimulates only one hemisphere. This study examined the effects of bihemispheric tDCS training on corticospinal tract excitability and muscle activity patterns during upper limb movements in a patient with subacute stroke.

Methods

In this single-case retrospective study, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Box and Block Test, electromyography, and intermuscular coherence measurement were performed. Intermuscular coherence was calculated at 15-30 Hz, which reflects corticospinal tract excitability.

Results

The results indicated that bihemispheric tDCS improved the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Box and Block Test, co-contraction, and intermuscular coherence results, as compared with anodal tDCS. Discussion: These results reveal that upper limb training with bihemispheric tDCS improves corticospinal tract excitability and muscle activity patterns in patients with subacute stroke.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Chronic Stroke: Is Neuroimaging the Answer to the Next Leap Forward?

During rehabilitation, a large proportion of stroke patients either plateau or begin to lose motor skills. By priming the motor system, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising clinical adjunct that could augment the gains acquired during therapy sessions. However, the extent to which patients show improvements following tDCS is highly variable. This variability may be due to heterogeneity in regions of cortical infarct, descending motor tract injury, and/or connectivity changes, all factors that require neuroimaging for precise quantification and that affect the actual amount and location of current delivery. If the relationship between these factors and tDCS efficacy were clarified, recovery from stroke using tDCS might be become more predictable. This review provides a comprehensive summary and timeline of the development of tDCS for stroke from the viewpoint of neuroimaging. Both animal and human studies that have explored detailed aspects of anatomy, connectivity, and brain activation dynamics relevant to tDCS are discussed. Selected computational works are also included to demonstrate how sophisticated strategies for reducing variable effects of tDCS, including electric field modeling, are moving the field ever closer towards the goal of personalizing tDCS for each individual. Finally, larger and more comprehensive randomized controlled trials involving tDCS for chronic stroke recovery are underway that likely will shed light on how specific tDCS parameters, such as dose, affect stroke outcomes. The success of these collective efforts will determine whether tDCS for chronic stroke gains regulatory approval and becomes clinical practice in the future.

Noninvasive Brain Stimulation for Neurorehabilitation in Post-Stroke Patients

Characterized by high morbidity, mortality, and disability, stroke usually causes symptoms of cerebral hypoxia due to a sudden blockage or rupture of brain vessels, and it seriously threatens human life and health. Rehabilitation is the essential treatment for post-stroke patients suffering from functional impairments, through which hemiparesis, aphasia, dysphagia, unilateral neglect, depression, and cognitive dysfunction can be restored to various degrees. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a popular neuromodulatory technology of rehabilitation focusing on the local cerebral cortex, which can improve clinical functions by regulating the excitability of corresponding neurons. Increasing evidence has been obtained from the clinical application of NIBS, especially repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). However, without a standardized protocol, existing studies on NIBS show a wide variation in terms of stimulation site, frequency, intensity, dosage, and other parameters. Its application for neurorehabilitation in post-stroke patients is still limited. With advances in neuronavigation technologies, functional near-infrared spectroscopy, and functional MRI, specific brain regions can be precisely located for stimulation. On the basis of our further understanding on neural circuits, neuromodulation in post-stroke rehabilitation has also evolved from single-target stimulation to co-stimulation of two or more targets, even circuits and the network. The present study aims to review the findings of current research, discuss future directions of NIBS application, and finally promote the use of NIBS in post-stroke rehabilitation.

Effects of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients: a double-blind, randomized sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) can simultaneously modulate bilateral corticospinal excitability and interhemispheric interaction. However, how tDCS affects subacute stroke recovery remains unclear. We investigated the effects of bihemispheric tDCS on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients.

METHODS

We enrolled subacute inpatients who had first-ever ischemic stroke at subcortical regions and moderate-to-severe baseline Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) score 2-56. Participants between 14 and 28 days after stroke were double-blind, randomly assigned (1:1) to receive real (n = 13) or sham (n = 14) bihemispheric tDCS (with ipsilesional M1 anode and contralesional M1 cathode, 20 min, 2 mA) during task practice twice daily for 20 sessions in two weeks. Residual integrity of the ipsilesional corticospinal tract was stratified between groups. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in FMA-UE score from baseline (responder as an increase ≥ 10). The secondary measures included changes in the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), FMA-Lower Extremity (FMA-LE) and explorative resting-state MRI functional connectivity (FC) of target regions after intervention and three months post-stroke.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven participants completed the study without significant adverse effects. Nineteen patients (70%) had no recordable baseline motor-evoked potentials (MEP-negative) from the paretic forearm. Compared with the sham group, the real tDCS group showed enhanced improvement of FMA-UE after intervention (p < 0.01, effect size η² = 0.211; responder rate: 77% vs. 36%, p = 0.031), which sustained three months post-stroke (p < 0.01), but not ARAT. Interestingly, in the MEP-negative subgroup analysis, the FMA-UE improvement remained but delayed. Additionally, the FMA-LE improvement after real tDCS was not significantly greater until three months post-stroke (p < 0.01). We found that the individual FMA-UE improvements after real tDCS were associated with bilateral intrahemispheric, rather than interhemispheric, FC strengths in the targeted cortices, while the improvements after sham tDCS were associated with predominantly ipsilesional FC changes after adjustment for age and sex (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bihemispheric tDCS during task-oriented training may facilitate motor recovery in subacute stroke patients, even with compromised corticospinal tract integrity. Further studies are warranted for tDCS efficacy and network-specific neuromodulation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: (ID: NCT02731508).

Effect of rTMS intervention on upper limb motor function after stroke: A study based on fNIRS

Background

Stroke is a disease with a high fatality rate worldwide and a major cause of long-term disability. In the rehabilitation of limb motor function after stroke, the rehabilitation of upper limb function takes a long time and the recovery progress is slow, which seriously affects the patients' self-care ability in daily life. Repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been increasingly used to improve limb dysfunction in patients with stroke. However, a standardized reference for selecting a magnetic stimulation regimen is not available. Whether to increase the inhibition of the contralateral hemispheric motor cortex remains controversial. This study has evaluated the effects of different rTMS stimulation programs on upper limb function and corresponding brain functional network characteristics of patients with stroke and sought a new objective standard based on changes in brain network parameters to guide accurate rTMS stimulation programs.

Method

Thirty-six patients with stroke were selected and divided into control group and treatment group by number table method, with 18 patients in each group, and 3 patients in the control group were turned out and lost due to changes in disease condition. The treatment group was divided into two groups. TMS1 group was given 1 Hz magnetic stimulation in the M1 region of the contralesional hemisphere +10 Hz magnetic stimulation in the M1 region of the affected hemisphere, and the TMS2 group was given 10 Hz magnetic stimulation in the M1 region of the affected hemisphere. The control group was given false stimulation. The treatment course was once a day for 5 days a week for 4 weeks. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity (FMA-UE) sand near-infrared brain function were collected before treatment, 2 weeks after treatment, and 4 weeks after treatment, and the brain function network was constructed. Changes in brain oxygenated hemoglobin concentration and brain network parameters were analyzed with the recovery of motor function (i.e., increased FMA score). Meanwhile, according to the average increment of brain network parameters, the rTMS stimulation group was divided into two groups with good efficacy and poor efficacy. Network parameters of the two groups before and after rTMS treatment were analyzed statistically.

Results

(1) Before treatment, there was no statistical difference in Fugl-Meyer score between the control group and the magnetic stimulation group (p = 0.178).Compared with before treatment, Fugl-Meyer scores of 2 and 4 weeks after treatment were significantly increased in both groups (p <0.001), and FMA scores of 4 weeks after treatment were significantly improved compared with 2 weeks after treatment (p < 0.001). FMA scores increased faster in the magnetic stimulation group at 2 and 4 weeks compared with the control group at the same time point (p <0.001).TMS1 and TMS2 were compared at the same time point, FMA score in TMS2 group increased more significantly after 4 weeks of treatment (p = 0.010). (2) Before treatment, HbO2 content in healthy sensory motor cortex (SMC) area of magnetic stimulation group and control group was higher than that in other region of interest (ROI) area, but there was no significant difference in ROI between the two groups. After 4 weeks of treatment, the HbO2 content in the healthy SMC area was significantly decreased (p < 0.001), while the HbO2 content in the affected SMC area was significantly increased, and the change was more significant in the magnetic stimulation group (p < 0.001). (3) In-depth study found that with the recovery of motor function (FMA upper limb score increase ≥4 points) after magnetic stimulation intervention, brain network parameters were significantly improved. The mean increment of network parameters in TMS1 group and TMS2 group was significantly different (χ ² = 5.844, p = 0.016). TMS2 group was more advantageous than TMS1 group in improving the mean increment of brain network parameters.

Conclusion

(1) The rTMS treatment is beneficial to the recovery of upper limb motor function in stroke patients, and can significantly improve the intensity of brain network connection and reduce the island area. The island area refers to an isolated activated brain area that cannot transmit excitation to other related brain areas. (2) When the node degree of M1_Healthy region less than 0.52, it is suggested to perform promotion therapy only in the affected hemisphere. While the node degree greater than 0.52, and much larger than that in the M1_affected region. it is suggested that both inhibition in the contralesional hemisphere and high-frequency excitatory magnetic stimulation in the affected hemisphere can be performed. (3) In different brain functional network connection states, corresponding adjustment should be made to the treatment plan of rTMS to achieve optimal therapeutic effect and precise rehabilitation treatment.

Effect of CPAP on cognitive function in stroke patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment on cognitive function in stroke patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) by exploring randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Published RCTs that assessed the therapeutic effects of CPAP on cognition in stroke patients with OSA, compared with controls or sham CPAP, were included. Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library, were searched in October 2020 and October 2021. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane collaboration tools. A random effects or fixed effects model was used according to heterogeneity. The outcomes were global cognitive gain, improvement in cognitive domain and subjective sleepiness.

RESULTS

7 RCTs, including 327 participants, comparing CPAP with control or sham CPAP treatment were included. 6 RCTs with 270 participants reported results related to global cognition, and CPAP treatment had no significant effects on global cognitive gain in stroke patients with OSA (standardised mean difference (SMD), 0.18; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.42; p=0.153). A subgroup analysis showed that an early start to (<2 weeks post stroke) CPAP treatment after stroke significantly improved global cognition (SMD, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.18 to 1.14; p=0.007), which was not found in the case of a delayed start to CPAP treatment. However, CPAP did not significantly help with memory, language, attention or executive function. Moreover, CPAP therapy significantly alleviated subjective sleepiness (SMD, -0.73; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.32; p≤0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of CPAP treatment might contribute to improvement in global cognition in stroke patients with OSA. This study had the following limitations: the sample size in each included study was relatively small; the scales related to cognitive assessment or subjective sleepiness were inconsistent; and the methodological quality was not high. Future trials should focus on including a greater number of stroke patients with OSA undergoing CPAP treatment.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020214709.

Narrative Review of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke Rehabilitation

Stroke is a disease with a high incidence and disability rate, resulting in changes in neural network and corticoid-subcortical excitability and various functional disabilities. The aim of the present study was to discuss the current status of research and limitations and potential direction in the application of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on post-stroke patients. This literature review focused on clinical studies and reviews. Literature retrieval was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and CNKI, using the following keywords: Repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation, Transcranial direct current stimulation, Transcranial alternating current stimulation, Transcranial alternating current stimulation, Transcranial focused ultrasound, Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation, Stroke, and Rehabilitation. We selected 200 relevant publications from 1985 to 2022. An overview of recent research on the use of NIBS on post-stroke patients, including its mechanism, therapeutic parameters, effects, and safety, is presented. It was found that NIBS has positive therapeutic effects on dysfunctions of motor, sensory, cognitive, speech, swallowing, and depression after stroke, but standardized stimulus programs are still lacking. The literature suggests that rTMS and tDCS are more beneficial to post-stroke patients, while tFUS and tVNS are currently less studied for post-stroke rehabilitation, but are also potential interventions.

Transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke - Motor excitability and motor function

OBJECTIVE

To characterize motor excitability changes and changes of motor performance induced by a single anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) session in stroke patients.

METHODS

Twenty subacute stroke patients participated. Motor performance was tested with the Box and Block Test [BBT]. Motor cortex excitability (short interval intracortical inhibition [SICI], intracortical facilitation [ICF], long interval intracortical inhibition [LICI]) was examined by paired pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation before and after a single tDCS session (20 minutes, 1,0 mA). On two different occasions, patients received anodal and cathodal tDCS over the affected hemisphere. TMS recordings were taken from both hands consecutively.

RESULTS

Anodal tDCS significantly reduced SICI without changing ICF or LICI. Cathodal tDCS did not change motor excitability. Both types of tDCS did not alter motor performance. Even prior to anodal tDCS, SICI in the affected hemisphere was lower than in the unaffected hemisphere and was correlated with BBT changes after anodal tDCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Anodal, but not cathodal tDCS specifically modulated intracortical inhibitory circuits, leading to a disinhibition.

SIGNIFICANCE

The results amplify our knowledge on excitability modulations of tDCS in stroke patients.

May Dual Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Enhance the Efficacy of Robot-Assisted Therapy for Promoting Upper Limb Recovery in Chronic Stroke?

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether dual transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may enhance the efficacy of exoskeleton robotic training on upper limb motor functions in patients with chronic stroke.

METHODS

A prospective, bi-center, double-blind, randomized clinical trial study was performed. Patients with moderate-to-severe stroke (according to The National Institute of Health Stroke Scale) were randomly assigned to receive dual or sham tDCS immediately before robotic therapy (10 sessions, 2 weeks). The primary outcome was the Fugl-Meyer for Upper Extremity, assessed before, after, and at the 12-week follow-up. Neurophysiological evaluation of corticospinal projections to upper limb muscles was performed by recording motor evoked potentials (MEPs). ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT03026712.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty individuals were tested for eligibility, of which 80 were enrolled and agreed to participate. Excluding 14 dropouts, 66 patients were randomly assigned into the 2 groups. Results showed that chronic patients were stable before treatment and significantly improved after that. The records within subject improvements were not significantly different between the 2 groups. However, a post-hoc analysis subdividing patients in 2 subgroups based on the presence or absence of MEPs at the baseline showed a significantly higher effect of real tDCS in patients without MEPs when compared to patients with MEPs (F = 4.6, P = .007).

CONCLUSION

The adjunction of dual tDCS to robotic arm training did not further enhance recovery in the treated sample of patients with chronic stroke. However, a significant improvement in the subgroup of patients with a severe corticospinal dysfunction (as suggested by the absence of MEPs) suggests that they could benefit from such a treatment combination.

Barriers to Enrollment in Post-Stroke Brain Stimulation in a Racially and Ethnically Diverse Population

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Brain stimulation is an adjuvant strategy to promote rehabilitation after stroke. Here, we evaluated the influence of inclusion/exclusion criteria on enrollment in a transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) trial in the context of a racially/ethnically diverse acute stroke service at University of Texas Southwestern (UTSW).

METHODS

3124 (59.7 ± 14.5 years) racially/ethnically diverse (38.4% non-Hispanic white, (W), Hispanic (H) 22%, African American (AA) 33.5%, Asian (A) 2.3%) patients were screened in the acute stroke service at UTSW. Demographics, stroke characteristics, and reasons for exclusion were recorded prospectively.

RESULTS

2327 (74.5%) patients had a verified stroke. Only 44 of them (1.9%) were eligible. Causes for exclusion included in order of importance: (1) magnitude of upper extremity (UE) motor impairment, (2) prior strokes (s), (3) hemorrhagic stroke, (4) psychiatric condition or inability to follow instructions, and (5) old age, of these (2) and (4) were more common in AA patients but not in other minorities. 31 of the 44 eligible individuals were enrolled (W 1.68%, H 1.37%, AA .77%, A 3.774%). 90.5% of verified stroke patients did not exhibit contraindications for stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

3 main conclusions emerged: (a) The main limitations for inclusion in brain stimulation trials of motor recovery were magnitude of UE motor impairments and stroke lesion characteristics, (b) most stroke patients could be stimulated with tDCS without safety concerns and (c) carefully tailored inclusion criteria could increase diversity in enrollment.Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01007136.

Five-Session Dual-Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Task-Specific Training Does Not Improve Gait and Lower Limb Performance Over Training Alone in Subacute Stroke: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of five-session dual-transcranial direct current stimulation (dual-tDCS) combined with task-specific training on gait and lower limb motor performance in individuals with subacute stroke.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five participants who had a stroke in the subacute phase with mild motor impairment were recruited, randomized, and allocated into two groups. The active group (n = 13) received dual-tDCS with anodal over the lesioned hemisphere M1 and cathodal over the nonlesioned hemisphere, at 2 mA for 20 min before training for five consecutive days, while the sham group (n = 12) received sham mode before training. Gait speed as a primary outcome, temporospatial gait variables, lower-limb functional tasks (sit-to-stand and walking mobility), and muscle strength as secondary outcomes were collected at preintervention and postintervention (day 5), one-week follow-up, and one-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The primary outcome and most of the secondary outcomes were improved in both groups, with no significant difference between the two groups, and most of the results indicated small to moderate effect sizes of active tDCS compared to sham tDCS.

CONCLUSION

The combined intervention showed no benefit over training alone in improving gait variables and lower-limb performance. However, some performances were saturated at some point, as moderate to high function participants were recruited in the present study. Future studies should consider recruiting participants with more varied motor impairment levels and may need to determine the optimal stimulation protocols and parameters to improve gait and lower-limb performance.

Safety and Adverse Events following Non-invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation in Stroke: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive electrical stimulation (ES) could have therapeutic potential in stroke recovery. However, there is no comprehensive evaluation of adverse events. This study systematically searched the literature to document frequency and prevalence of adverse events. A secondary aim was to explore associations between adverse events and ES parameters or participant characteristics.Methods: Databases were searched for studies evaluating ES in adults with stroke. All included studies were required to report on adverse events. Extracted data were: (1) study design; (2) adverse events; (3) participant characteristics; (4) ES parameters.

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies were included. Adverse events were minor in nature. The most frequently reported adverse events were tingling (37.3% of papers), burning (18.7%), headaches (14.7%) and fatigue (14.7%). Cathodal stimulation was associated with greater frequency of itching (p = .02), intensities of 1-2 mA with increased tingling (p = .04) and discomfort (p = .03), and current density <0.4mA/cm2 with greater discomfort (p = .03). Tingling was the most prevalent adverse event (18.1% of participants), with prevalence data not differing between active and control conditions (all p ≥ 0.37). Individual participants were more likely to report adverse events with increasing current density (r = 0.99, p = .001). Two severe adverse events were noted (a seizure and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement).

CONCLUSION

ES appears safe in people with stroke as reported adverse events were predominantly minor in nature. An adverse events questionnaire is proposed to enable a more comprehensive and nuanced analysis of the frequency and prevalence of adverse events.

Comparing different montages of transcranial direct current stimulation on dual-task walking and cortical activity in chronic stroke: double-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation to modulate cortical activity for improving motor function. However, the different tDCS applications for modulating cortical activity and dual task gait performance in chronic stroke have not yet been investigated. This study investigated the effects of different tDCS applications on dual task gait performance and contralesional M1 activation in chronic stroke.

METHODS

Forty-eight participants were randomized to anodal, bilateral, cathodal, and sham tDCS groups. Each group received 20 min of tDCS stimulation, except the sham group. Gait performance was measured by GaitRite system during cognitive dual task (CDT) walking, motor dual task (MDT) walking, and single walking (SW). Contralesional M1 activity of unaffected tibialis anterior (TA) was measured using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Intragroup difference was analyzed by Wilconxon sign ranks test with Bonferroni correction, and Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance by ranks was used for intergroup comparisons, followed by post-hoc Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction.

RESULTS

The bilateral tDCS (p = 0.017) and cathodal tDCS (p = 0.010) improved the CDT walking speed more than sham group. The bilateral tDCS (p = 0.048) and cathodal tDCS (p = 0.048) also improved the MDT walking speed more than sham group. Furthermore, bilateral tDCS (p = 0.012) and cathodal tDCS (p = 0.040) increased the silent period (SP) more than the anodal and sham group. Thus, one-session of bilateral and cathodal tDCS improved dual task walking performance paralleled with increasing contralesional corticomotor inhibition in chronic stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that one-session of bilateral and cathodal tDCS increased contralesional corticomotor inhibition and improved dual task gait performance in chronic stroke.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR20180116001). Registered prospectively on 16th Jan, 2018 at http://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org .

Predictive models for response to non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke: A critical review of opportunities and pitfalls

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive brain stimulation has been successfully applied to improve stroke-related impairments in different behavioral domains. Yet, clinical translation is limited by heterogenous outcomes within and across studies. It has been proposed to develop and apply noninvasive brain stimulation in a patient-tailored, precision medicine-guided fashion to maximize response rates and effect magnitude. An important prerequisite for this task is the ability to accurately predict the expected response of the individual patient.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to discuss current approaches studying noninvasive brain stimulation in stroke and challenges associated with the development of predictive models of responsiveness to noninvasive brain stimulation.

METHODS

Narrative review.

RESULTS

Currently, the field largely relies on in-sample associational studies to assess the impact of different influencing factors. However, the associational approach is not valid for making claims of prediction, which generalize out-of-sample. We will discuss crucial requirements for valid predictive modeling in particular the presence of sufficiently large sample sizes.

CONCLUSION

Modern predictive models are powerful tools that must be wielded with great care. Open science, including data sharing across research units to obtain sufficiently large and unbiased samples, could provide a solid framework for addressing the task of building robust predictive models for noninvasive brain stimulation responsiveness.