Literature DB >> 31480966

Central Nervous System Electrical Stimulation for Neuroprotection in Acute Cerebral Ischemia: Meta-Analysis of Preclinical Studies.

Mersedeh Bahr Hosseini1, Jesse Hou1, Marom Bikson2, Marco Iacoboni3, Jeffrey Gornbein2, Jeffrey L Saver1.   

Abstract

Background and Purpose- Brain electrical stimulation, widely studied to facilitate recovery from stroke, has also been reported to confer direct neuroprotection in preclinical models of acute cerebral ischemia. Systematic review of controlled preclinical acute cerebral ischemia studies would aid in planning for initial human clinical trials. Methods- A systematic Medline search identified controlled, preclinical studies of central nervous system electrical stimulation in acute cerebral ischemia. Studies were categorized among 6 stimulation strategies. Three strategies applied different stimulation types to tissues within the ischemic zone (cathodal hemispheric stimulation [CHS], anodal hemispheric stimulation, and pulsed hemispheric stimulation), and 3 strategies applied deep brain stimulation to different neuronal targets remote from the ischemic zone (fastigial nucleus stimulation, subthalamic vasodilator area stimulation, and dorsal periaqueductal gray stimulation). Random-effects meta-analysis assessed electrical stimulation modification of final infarct volume. Study-level risk of bias and intervention-level readiness-for-translation were assessed using formal rating scales. Results- Systematic search identified 28 experiments in 21 studies, including a total of 350 animals, of electrical stimulation in preclinical acute cerebral ischemia. Overall, in animals undergoing electrical stimulation, final infarct volumes were reduced by 37% (95% CI, 34%-40%; P<0.001), compared with control. There was evidence of heterogeneity of efficacy among stimulation strategies (I2=93.1%, Pheterogeneity<0.001). Among the within-ischemic zone stimulation strategies, only CHS significantly reduced the infarct volume (27 %; 95% CI, 22%-33%; P<0.001); among the remote-from ischemic zone approaches, all (fastigial nucleus stimulation, subthalamic vasodilator area stimulation, and dorsal periaqueductal gray stimulation) reduced infarct volumes by approximately half. On formal rating scales, CHS studies had the lowest risk of bias, and CHS had the highest overall quality of intervention-level evidence supporting readiness to proceed to clinical testing. Conclusions- Electrical stimulation reduces final infarct volume across preclinical studies. CHS shows the most robust evidence and is potentially appropriate for progression to early-stage human clinical trial testing as a promising neuroprotective intervention.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acute stroke; central nervous system; electrical stimulation; meta-analysis; neuroprotection

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31480966      PMCID: PMC6756951          DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025364

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN: 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


  31 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance imaging demonstrates that electric stimulation of cerebellar fastigial nucleus reduces cerebral infarction in rats.

Authors:  S B Berger; D Ballon; M Graham; M D Underwood; M Khayata; R D Leggiero; J A Koutcher; D J Reis
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 7.914

2.  Neuroprotective electrical stimulation of cerebellar fastigial nucleus attenuates expression of periinfarction depolarizing waves (PIDs) and inhibits cortical spreading depression.

Authors:  E V Golanov; D J Reis
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1999-02-13       Impact factor: 3.252

3.  Stimulation of the subthalamic vasodilator area and fastigial nucleus independently protects the brain against focal ischemia.

Authors:  S B Glickstein; C P Ilch; D J Reis; E V Golanov
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2001-08-31       Impact factor: 3.252

4.  Intrinsic neurons of fastigial nucleus mediate neurogenic neuroprotection against excitotoxic and ischemic neuronal injury in rat.

Authors:  S B Glickstein; E V Golanov; D J Reis
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1999-05-15       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Electrical stimulation of the cerebral cortex exerts antiapoptotic, angiogenic, and anti-inflammatory effects in ischemic stroke rats through phosphoinositide 3-kinase/Akt signaling pathway.

Authors:  Tanefumi Baba; Masahiro Kameda; Takao Yasuhara; Takamasa Morimoto; Akihiko Kondo; Tetsuro Shingo; Naoki Tajiri; Feifei Wang; Yasuyuki Miyoshi; Cesario V Borlongan; Mitsunori Matsumae; Isao Date
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  Electrical stimulation of cerebellar fastigial nucleus reduces ischemic infarction elicited by middle cerebral artery occlusion in rat.

Authors:  D J Reis; S B Berger; M D Underwood; M Khayata
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 6.200

Review 7.  Clinical pharmacological issues in the development of acute stroke therapies.

Authors:  G A Ford
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 8.739

Review 8.  Update of the stroke therapy academic industry roundtable preclinical recommendations.

Authors:  Marc Fisher; Giora Feuerstein; David W Howells; Patricia D Hurn; Thomas A Kent; Sean I Savitz; Eng H Lo
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  Electrical stimulation of the dorsal periaqueductal gray decreases volume of the brain infarction independently of accompanying hypertension and cerebrovasodilation.

Authors:  Sara B Glickstein; Christopher P Ilch; Eugene V Golanov
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2003-12-24       Impact factor: 3.252

10.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  From adults to pediatrics: A review noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) to facilitate recovery from brain injury.

Authors:  Georgia H O'Leary; Dorothea D Jenkins; Patricia Coker-Bolt; Mark S George; Steve Kautz; Marom Bikson; Bernadette T Gillick; Bashar W Badran
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 2.624

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.