Neuronavigated 1 Hz rTMS of the left angular gyrus combined with visuospatial therapy in post-stroke neglect

Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Poststroke Hemineglect: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BackgroundAlthough various repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and theta burst stimulation (TBS) protocols are used, their comparative effectiveness for treating poststroke hemineglect remains unassessed.ObjectiveTo investigate rTMS and TBS effects on clinical outcomes in poststroke hemineglect through a systematic review and network meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to March 7, 2024, for trials on rTMS or TBS in poststroke hemineglect. Included studies involved rTMS or TBS with different protocols, sham, or no stimulation, assessing hemineglect severity or impact. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the PEDro scale. The network meta-analysis was performed using ShinyNMA (version 1.01).ResultsWe analyzed 13 studies with 309 participants. All studies included participants who had experienced right hemisphere stroke. All included studies had a fair to good quality based on PEDro score evaluation. Protocols included continuous TBS (cTBS), high-frequency rTMS (HF-rTMS), and low-frequency rTMS (LF-rTMS) targeting both contralesional and lesional sites. HF-rTMS on the lesional site significantly improved short-term results on the line bisection test and Catherine Bergego Scale; LF-rTMS on the contralesional site improved short-term line bisection; and cTBS on the contralesional site improved long-term line bisection. No severe adverse events or significant inconsistencies were reported.ConclusionsOur findings indicate that HF-rTMS targeting the lesional site is the preferred therapeutic approach for the short-term management of poststroke hemineglect. LF-rTMS directed at the contralesional site is a practical alternative. Moreover, cTBS targeting the contralesional site is a viable option because of its long-term effect.

Does repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation have a beneficial effect on improving unilateral spatial neglect caused by stroke? A meta-analysis

This review aimed to assess the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in improving post-stroke unilateral spatial neglect (USN) using a meta-analysis. Further, we aimed to identify any association between rTMS parameters, patient demographics, and treatment effect sizes using subgroup analyses and meta-regression. A literature search was conducted through four databases from inception to March 6, 2024, to retrieve all relevant controlled trials investigating the effects of rTMS on symptoms of USN in post-stroke patients. Overall, rTMS significantly improved post-stroke USN, as measured by the line bisection test (Hedges' g = - 1.301, p < 0.0001), the cancelation test (Hedge's g = - 1.512, p < 0.0001), and the Catherine Bergego Scale (Hedges'g = - 0.770, p < 0.0001), compared to sham stimulation. Subgroup analysis found that generally larger effect sizes following excitatory rTMS across several outcome measures, indicating that excitatory rTMS on the ipsilesional hemisphere may be more effective than inhibitory rTMS on the contralesional hemisphere in ameliorating neglect symptoms. Meta-regression analysis of the line bisection test showed a significant difference in the chronicity of stroke patients, suggesting that rTMS may be more effective for USN in patients at the acute stage (within 3 months since stroke) than in those at the post-acute stage (p = 0.035). In conclusion, rTMS appears to be effective in promoting recovery from post-stroke USN. Excitatory protocols and early intervention may enhance recovery outcomes for neglect behaviors in post-stroke survivors.

Evidence of rTMS for Motor or Cognitive Stroke Recovery: Hype or Hope?

BACKGROUND

Evidence of efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for stroke recovery is hampered by an unexplained variability of reported effect sizes and an insufficient understanding of mechanisms of action. We aimed to (1) briefly summarize evidence of efficacy, (2) identify critical factors to explain the reported variation in effects, and (3) provide mechanism-based recommendations for future trials.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature according to Cochrane and PRISMA Protocols. We included trials with ≥10 patients per treatment group. We classified outcome measures according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Meta-analysis was done when at least 3 trials were reported on the same construct. In case of significant summary effect sizes with significant heterogeneity, we used sensitivity analyses to test for correlations and differences between found individual effect sizes and possible effect modifiers such as patient-, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation-, and trial characteristics.

RESULTS

We included 57 articles (N=2595). Funnel plots showed no publication bias. We found significant effect sizes at the level of body function (upper limb synergies, muscle strength, language functioning, global cognitive functioning, visual/spatial inattention) with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation within or beyond 3 months after stroke. We also found significant effect sizes at the level of activities. We found no subgroup differences or significant correlations between individual summary effect sizes and any tested possible effect modifier.

CONCLUSIONS

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation holds the potential to benefit a range of motor and cognitive outcomes after stroke, but the evidence of efficacy is challenged by unexplained heterogeneity across many small sampled trials. We propose large trials with the collection of individual patient data on baseline severity and brain network integrity with sufficiently powered subgroup analyses, as well as protocolized time-locked training of the target behavior. Additional neurophysiological and biomechanical data may help in understanding mechanisms and identifying biomarkers of treatment efficacy.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: CRD42022300330.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined with Cognitive Training for Cognitive Function and Activities of Daily Living in Patients with Post-Stroke Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the potential effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with cognitive training for post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI), there is uncertainty regarding rTMS combined with cognitive training for PSCI.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of rTMS combined with cognitive training for improving global cognitive function, specific domains of cognitive function and activities of daily living (ADL) in patients with PSCI.

METHODS

Databases including Cochrane Central, EMBASE (Ovid SP), CHINAL, APA PsycINFO, EBSCO, Medline, Web of science and other sources were systematically searched on March 23, 2022, and updated on December 5, 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) applied rTMS + cognitive training for patients with PSCI were screened for inclusion.

RESULTS

A total of 8 trials was finally included and 336 participants provided data for meta-analyses. Large effects were found for rTMS + cognitive training on global cognition (g = 0.780, 95% CI = 0.477 to 1.083), executive function (g = 0.769, 95% CI = 0.291 to 1.247), working memory (g = 0.609, 95% CI = 0.158-1.061) and medium improvement on ADL (g = 0.418, 95% CI = 0.058 to 0.778) were seen. While, no effects were found on memory or attention. Subgroup analyses showed that combinations of phase of stroke onset, rTMS frequency, stimulation site and stimulation sessions were potent factors that modulate the effects of rTMS + cognitive training for cognitive function.

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled data showed more positive effects of rTMS + cognitive training for global cognition, executive function, working memory and ADL in patients with PSCI. While, robust evidence of rTMS + cognitive training for global cognition, executive function, working memory and ADL from the Grade recommendations is lacking. Further, rTMS + cognitive training did not show no better effects on memory. Future definitive trials are needed to determine the benefits of rTMS + cognitive training for cognitive function and ADL in the field of PSCI.

Non-pharmacological interventions for spatial neglect or inattention following stroke and other non-progressive brain injury

BACKGROUND

People with spatial neglect after stroke or other brain injury have difficulty attending to one side of space. Various rehabilitation interventions have been used, but evidence of their benefit is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to determine the effects of non-pharmacological interventions for people with spatial neglect after stroke and other adult-acquired non-progressive brain injury.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched October 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; last searched October 2020), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2020), Embase (1980 to October 2020), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1983 to October 2020), and PsycINFO (1974 to October 2020). We also searched ongoing trials registers and screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any non-pharmacological intervention specifically aimed at spatial neglect. We excluded studies of general rehabilitation and studies with mixed participant groups, unless separate neglect data were available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Review authors categorised the interventions into eight broad types deemed to be applicable to clinical practice through iterative discussion: visual interventions, prism adaptation, body awareness interventions, mental function interventions, movement interventions, non-invasive brain stimulation, electrical stimulation, and acupuncture. We assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 65 RCTs with 1951 participants, all of which included people with spatial neglect following stroke. Most studies measured outcomes using standardised neglect assessments. Fifty-one studies measured effects on ADL immediately after completion of the intervention period; only 16 reported persisting effects on ADL (our primary outcome). One study (30 participants) reported discharge destination, and one (24 participants) reported depression. No studies reported falls, balance, or quality of life. Only two studies were judged to be entirely at low risk of bias, and all were small, with fewer than 50 participants per group. We found no definitive (phase 3) clinical trials. None of the studies reported any patient or public involvement. Visual interventions versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of visual interventions for spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (2 studies, 55 participants) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.57 to 0.49); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; and immediate neglect assessments. Prism adaptation versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of prism adaptation for spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (2 studies, 39 participants) (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.93 to 0.35); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; and immediate neglect assessments. Body awareness interventions versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of body awareness interventions for spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (5 studies, 125 participants) (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.97); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; immediate neglect assessments; and adverse events. Mental function interventions versus any control: we found no trials of mental function interventions for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of mental function interventions on spatial neglect based on measures of immediate functional ability in ADL and immediate neglect assessments. Movement interventions versus any control: we found no trials of movement interventions for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of body awareness interventions on spatial neglect based on measures of immediate functional ability in ADL and immediate neglect assessments. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of NIBS on spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (3 studies, 92 participants) (SMD 0.35, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.77); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; immediate neglect assessments; and adverse events. Electrical stimulation versus any control: we found no trials of electrical stimulation for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of electrical stimulation on spatial neglect based on immediate neglect assessments. Acupuncture versus any control: we found no trials of acupuncture for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of acupuncture on spatial neglect based on measures of immediate functional ability in ADL and immediate neglect assessments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for spatial neglect in improving functional ability in ADL and increasing independence remains unproven. Many strategies have been proposed to aid rehabilitation of spatial neglect, but none has yet been sufficiently researched through high-quality fully powered randomised trials to establish potential or adverse effects. As a consequence, no rehabilitation approach can be supported or refuted based on current evidence from RCTs. As recommended by a number of national clinical guidelines, clinicians should continue to provide rehabilitation for neglect that enables people to meet their rehabilitation goals. Clinicians and stroke survivors should have the opportunity, and are strongly encouraged, to participate in research. Future studies need to have appropriate high-quality methodological design, delivery, and reporting to enable appraisal and interpretation of results. Future studies also must evaluate outcomes of importance to patients, such as persisting functional ability in ADL. One way to improve the quality of research is to involve people with experience with the condition in designing and running trials.

Comparison of hemodynamic changes after repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the anatomical hand knob and hand motor hotspot: A functional near-infrared spectroscopy study

BACKGROUND

Low-frequency rTMS can induce upregulation of excitability in the contralateral hemisphere by interhemispheric interaction.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of interhemispheric modulation on hemodynamic changes after applying low-frequency rTMS over the anatomical hand knob (HK) and the hand motor hotspot (hMHS) in the dominant motor cortex.

METHODS

Ten healthy right-handed participants without a history of neurological or psychiatric symptoms (five males; 29.8±2.8 years) participated in this single-blind, randomized, cross-over study. rTMS was applied under three conditions over the dominant (left) hemisphere for 20 minutes: 1) 1 Hz rTMS stimulation on the HK (HK-rTMS), 2) 1 Hz rTMS stimulation on the hMHS (hMHS-rTMS), and 3) sham stimulation (Sham-rTMS). For all participants, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was applied for measurement of cerebral oxyhemoglobin (oxyHb) and deoxyhemoglobin (deoxyHb) concentration over the non-dominant (right) hemisphere during a serial reaction time task (SRTT) with the non-dominant (left) hand before and after each condition.

RESULTS

The average coordinates of the hMHS (x = - 39.60 mm, y = - 17.11 mm, z = 66.40 mm) were anterior and lateral to the HK (x = - 36.72 mm, y = - 28.87 mm, z = 56.41 mm). In fNIRS time-series analysis, the integral value of oxyHb wassignificantly increased over the motor cortical region of the non-dominant hemisphere after the hMHS-rTMS compared with Sham-rTMS. The HK-rTMS also showed slight increment of oxyHb concentration but without statistical significance. The SPM group analysis showed greater magnitude of the activity in hMHS-rTMS than that of HK-rTMS after stimulation (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrated an interhemispheric modulation effect of hemodynamic changes by 1 Hz rTMS. The hMHS produced a more robust modulation effect of 1 Hz rTMS on the contralateral hemisphere than did the HK. Therefore, the rTMS can be considered a better stimulation target than the HK.