Noninvasive Brain Stimulation to Enhance Functional Recovery After Stroke: Studies in Animal Models.
Julia Boonzaier, Geralda A F van Tilborg, Sebastiaan F W Neggers and 1 others
PMID 30352528WHAT IT FOUND
Most rodent stroke studies reviewed found rTMS or tDCS improved function or tissue preservation, but protocols varied, some results were negative, and study quality was low.
This was not a human treatment trial.
Key findings
01The review covered 19 rodent stroke studies using rTMS or tDCS, and most reported tissue preservation or functional improvement compared with control or sham groups.
02Many studies were of low reporting quality, and none described sample-size calculation or allocation concealment.
03Some protocols were harmful, including anodal tDCS soon after stroke increasing bleeding and infarct volume and cathodal tDCS worsening motor recovery.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a review of animal stroke studies, not a clinical trial in people. Many included studies were of low reporting quality, and none described sample-size calculation or allocation concealment. Stimulation protocols varied widely in frequency, intensity, timing, target, and outcome measures, so the paper cannot identify a standard protocol. Negative or null findings may be underreported, so the review may overstate positive effects. All tDCS studies used anesthesia, and its effect on outcomes is not known.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that rTMS or tDCS will improve function in patients. The reviewed studies were in rodents, many had low quality reporting, and the authors say standardized protocols and optimal timing are not known.