Anzeige
21.03.2024 | Original Article
Efficacy of rTMS in treating functional impairment in post-stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Erschienen in: Neurological Sciences
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
Most stroke patients suffer from an imbalance in blood supply, which causes severe brain damage leading to functional deficits in motor, sensory, swallowing, cognitive, emotional, and speech functions. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is thought to restore functions impaired during the stroke process and improve the quality of life of stroke patients. However, the efficacy of rTMS in treating post-stroke function impairment varies significantly. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of the number of patients with effective rTMS in treating post-stroke dysfunction.
Methods
The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Screening and full-text review were performed by three investigators. Single-group rate meta-analysis was performed on the extracted data using a random variable model. Then subgroup analyses were performed at the levels of stroke acuity (acute, chronic, or subacute); post-stroke symptoms (including upper and lower limb motor function, dysphagia, depression, aphasia); rTMS stimulation site (affected side, unaffected side); and whether or not it was a combination therapy.
Results
We obtained 8955 search records, and finally 33 studies (2682 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall analysis found that effective strength (ES) of rTMS was 0.53. In addition, we found that the ES of rTMS from acute/subacute/chronic post-stroke was 0.69, 0.45, and 0.52. We also found that the ES of rTMS using high-frequency stimulation was 0.56, while the ES of rTMS using low-frequency stimulation was 0.53. From post-stroke symptoms, we found that the ES of rTMS in sensory aspects, upper limb functional aspects, swallowing function, and aphasia was 0.50, 0.52, 0.51, and 0.54. And from the site of rTMS stimulation, we found that the ES of rTMS applied to the affected side was 0.51, while the ES applied to the unaffected side was 0.54. What’s more, we found that the ES of rTMS applied alone was 0.53, while the ES of rTMS applied in conjunction with other therapeutic modalities was 0.53.
Conclusions
By comparing the results of the data, we recommend rTMS as a treatment option for rehabilitation of functional impairment in patients after stroke. We also recommend that rehabilitation physicians or clinicians use combination therapy as one of the options for patients.