Suppr超能文献

非侵入性脑刺激技术改善脑卒中后日常生活活动上肢运动功能和表现的系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Techniques for the Improvement of Upper Limb Motor Function and Performance in Activities of Daily Living After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Pain in Motion International Research Group, Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa, Institute of Graduate Studies, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Istanbul, Turkey.

Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2023 Oct;104(10):1683-1697. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2023.04.027. Epub 2023 May 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation (NiBS) such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), theta-burst stimulation (TBS), and transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) in upper limb stroke rehabilitation.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched from January 2010 to June 2022.

DATA SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of "tDCS", "rTMS", "TBS", or "taVNS" on upper limb motor function and performance in activities of daily livings (ADLs) after stroke.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

87 RCTs with 3750 participants were included. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that all NiBS except continuous TBS (cTBS) and cathodal tDCS were significantly more efficacious than sham stimulation for motor function (standardized mean difference [SMD] range 0.42-1.20), whereas taVNS, anodal tDCS, and both low and high frequency rTMS were significantly more efficacious than sham stimulation for ADLs (SMD range 0.54-0.99). NMA showed that taVNS was more effective than cTBS (SMD:1.00; 95% CI (0.02-2.02)), cathodal tDCS (SMD:1.07; 95% CI (0.21-1.92)), and Physical rehabilitation alone (SMD:1.46; 95% CI (0.59-2.33)) for improving motor function. P-score found that taVNS is best ranked treatment in improving motor function (SMD: 1.20; 95% CI (0.46-1.95)) and ADLs (SMD:1.20; 95% CI (0.45-1.94)) after stroke. After taVNS, excitatory stimulation protocols (intermittent TBS, anodal tDCS, and HF-rTMS) are most effective in improving motor function and ADLs after acute/sub-acute (SMD range 0.53-1.63) and chronic stroke (SMD range 0.39-1.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that excitatory stimulation protocols are the most promising intervention in improving upper limb motor function and performance in ADLs. taVNS appeared to be a promising intervention for stroke patients, but further large RCTs are required to confirm its relative superiority.

摘要

目的

比较非侵入性脑刺激(NiBS),如经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)、重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)、θ爆发刺激(TBS)和经皮迷走神经刺激(taVNS)在上肢卒中康复中的疗效。

资料来源

从 2010 年 1 月至 2022 年 6 月,检索了 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 数据库。

资料选择

评估“tDCS”、“rTMS”、“TBS”或“taVNS”对上肢运动功能和日常生活活动(ADL)表现影响的随机对照试验(RCT)。

资料提取

由 2 名独立评审员提取数据。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。

资料综合

纳入 87 项 RCT,共 3750 名参与者。配对荟萃分析显示,除连续 TBS(cTBS)和阴极 tDCS 外,所有 NiBS 对运动功能均显著优于假刺激(标准化均数差[SMD]范围 0.42-1.20),而 taVNS、阳极 tDCS 和低频及高频 rTMS 对 ADL 均显著优于假刺激(SMD 范围 0.54-0.99)。NMA 显示 taVNS 比 cTBS(SMD:1.00;95%CI(0.02-2.02))、阴极 tDCS(SMD:1.07;95%CI(0.21-1.92))和单纯物理康复(SMD:1.46;95%CI(0.59-2.33))更有效改善运动功能。P 评分发现,taVNS 在改善运动功能(SMD:1.20;95%CI(0.46-1.95))和 ADL(SMD:1.20;95%CI(0.45-1.94))方面的治疗效果最佳。在 taVNS 后,兴奋性刺激方案(间歇性 TBS、阳极 tDCS 和高频 rTMS)在上肢急性/亚急性(SMD 范围 0.53-1.63)和慢性卒中(SMD 范围 0.39-1.16)后改善运动功能和 ADL 最有效。

结论

证据表明,兴奋性刺激方案是改善上肢运动功能和 ADL 表现最有前途的干预措施。taVNS 似乎是一种有前途的卒中患者干预措施,但需要进一步的大型 RCT 来证实其相对优势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验