Chi Zhang1, Jian-Xiong Wang1, Fu-Hua Sun1, Yu-Jie Xie1, Xia Ou2, Shi-Bin Yang1. 1. Rehabilitation Medicine Department, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, People's Republic of China; Rehabilitation Medicine Department, The Southwest Medical University, 646000 Luzhou, Sichuan, People's Republic of China. 2. Nuclear Medicine Department, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for the rehabilitation of stroke remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of VNS on the rehabilitation of stroke. METHODS: We search PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through March 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of VNS on the rehabilitation of stroke. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model. RESULTS: Three RCTs are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group in stroke, VNS is associated with significantly improved FMA-UE (SMD = 3.86; 95% CI = 1.19 to 6.52; P = 0.005) and Motor Function Test (SMD = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.62; P = 0.03), but has no obvious impact on Box and Block Test (SMD = -0.31; 95% CI = -3.48 to 2.86; P = 0.85), Nine-Hole Peg Test (SMD = 8.35; 95% CI = -40.59 to 57.28; P = 0.74), atrial fibrillation (RR = 3.46; 95% CI = 0.39 to 30.57; P = 0.26) or adverse events (RR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.21 to 1.61; P = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: VNS may be beneficial to the rehabilitation of stroke.
INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for the rehabilitation of stroke remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of VNS on the rehabilitation of stroke. METHODS: We search PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through March 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of VNS on the rehabilitation of stroke. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model. RESULTS: Three RCTs are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group in stroke, VNS is associated with significantly improved FMA-UE (SMD = 3.86; 95% CI = 1.19 to 6.52; P = 0.005) and Motor Function Test (SMD = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.62; P = 0.03), but has no obvious impact on Box and Block Test (SMD = -0.31; 95% CI = -3.48 to 2.86; P = 0.85), Nine-Hole Peg Test (SMD = 8.35; 95% CI = -40.59 to 57.28; P = 0.74), atrial fibrillation (RR = 3.46; 95% CI = 0.39 to 30.57; P = 0.26) or adverse events (RR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.21 to 1.61; P = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: VNS may be beneficial to the rehabilitation of stroke.
Authors: Jorge A Ramos-Castaneda; Carlos Federico Barreto-Cortes; Diego Losada-Floriano; Sandra Milena Sanabria-Barrera; Federico A Silva-Sieger; Ronald G Garcia Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 4.086