College of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, 250355, Shandong, China.
Neurol Sci. 2023 Jul;44(7):2311-2327. doi: 10.1007/s10072-023-06743-7. Epub 2023 Mar 21.
To systematically evaluate the rehabilitation effect of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on disorder of consciousness (DOC) after brain injury and compare the effects of different NIBSs.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effect of NIBS on DOC after brain injury were retrieved from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, and CBM databases from inception to October 2022. The risk of bias and quality of the trials were assessed following the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews and the physiotherapy evidence database Jadad Scale. Statistical analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.4 and R Studio. This study was registered on PROSPERO (No. CRD42022371334).
A total of 28 articles were included involving 1118 patients. Meta-analysis showed that NIBS combined with routine rehabilitation had the highest effect than the routine rehabilitation and the sham NIBS combined with routine rehabilitation. The cumulative probability ranking results showed that the rTMS was best. The order of network meta-analysis with GCS (Glasgow Coma Scale) as the outcome index is rTMS combined with routine rehabilitation > tDCS combined with routine rehabilitation > routine rehabilitation > NIBS sham stimulation combined with routine rehabilitation. The order of network meta-analysis with CRS-R (Coma Recovery Scale-Revised) as the outcome index is rTMS combined with routine rehabilitation > tDCS combined with routine rehabilitation > NIBS sham stimulation combined with routine rehabilitation > routine rehabilitation. For patients with different conditions of DOC, the subgroup analysis results showed that rTMS improved the effect of patients with severe DOC better than those with unclear conditions of DOC, but the overall results of the two groups were not significantly different. On the contrary, the effect of tDCS on patients with DOC whose condition was not clear was better than that on patients with severe DOC, and the effect on patients with severe DOC was not significant (P > 0.05). In terms of safety, only 9 articles mentioned ADRs in the included literature, including 8 articles without ADRs, and 1 article with ADRs.
Based on the research results of various indicators, NIBS can improve DOC after brain injury, and the rTMS is the best. Limited by the number and the quality of literature, the above conclusions need more high-quality research to verify.
系统评价非侵入性脑刺激(NIBS)对脑损伤后意识障碍(DOC)的康复效果,并比较不同 NIBS 的效果。
从 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、CNKI、VIP、万方数据和 CBM 数据库中检索到脑损伤后 NIBS 对 DOC 影响的随机对照试验(RCT),检索时间为建库至 2022 年 10 月。按照 Cochrane 系统评价手册和物理治疗证据数据库 Jadad 量表评估试验的偏倚风险和质量。使用 RevMan 5.4 和 R Studio 进行统计分析。本研究已在 PROSPERO(注册号:CRD42022371334)上注册。
共纳入 28 篇文章,涉及 1118 例患者。Meta 分析显示,NIBS 联合常规康复治疗的效果优于常规康复治疗和假 NIBS 联合常规康复治疗。累积概率排序结果显示 rTMS 效果最佳。以 GCS(格拉斯哥昏迷量表)为结局指标的网络荟萃分析结果表明,rTMS 联合常规康复治疗>tDCS 联合常规康复治疗>常规康复治疗>NIBS 假刺激联合常规康复治疗。以 CRS-R(修订版昏迷恢复量表)为结局指标的网络荟萃分析结果表明,rTMS 联合常规康复治疗>tDCS 联合常规康复治疗>NIBS 假刺激联合常规康复治疗>常规康复治疗。对于不同 DOC 状态的患者,亚组分析结果表明,rTMS 改善重度 DOC 患者的效果优于状态不明确的患者,但两组总体结果无显著差异。相反,tDCS 对状态不明确的 DOC 患者的效果优于重度 DOC 患者,对重度 DOC 患者的效果不显著(P>0.05)。在安全性方面,仅有 9 篇纳入文献提及 ADRs,其中 8 篇无 ADRs,1 篇有 ADRs。
基于各项指标的研究结果,NIBS 可改善脑损伤后 DOC,其中 rTMS 效果最佳。受文献数量和质量的限制,上述结论还需要更多高质量的研究来验证。