Literature DB >> 34074864

An Exploratory Study of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Individuals With Chronic Stroke Aphasia.

Andrew T DeMarco1,2, Elizabeth Dvorak1, Elizabeth Lacey2,3, Catherine J Stoodley4, Peter E Turkeltaub2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Aphasia is a common, debilitating consequence of stroke, and speech therapy is often inadequate to achieve a satisfactory outcome. Neuromodulation techniques have emerged as a potential augmentative treatment for improving aphasia outcomes. Most studies have targeted the cerebrum, but there are theoretical and practical reasons that stimulation over the cerebral hemispheres might not be ideal. On the other hand, the right cerebellum is functionally and anatomically linked to major language areas in the left hemisphere, making it a promising alternative target site for stimulation.
OBJECTIVE: To provide preliminary effect sizes for the ability of a short course of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeted over the right cerebellum to enhance language processing in individuals with chronic poststroke aphasia.
METHOD: Ten individuals received five sessions of open-label anodal tDCS targeting the right cerebellum. The effects of the tDCS were compared with the effects of sham tDCS on 14 controls from a previous clinical trial. In total, 24 individuals with chronic poststroke aphasia participated in the study. Behavioral testing was conducted before treatment, immediately following treatment, and at the 3-month follow-up.
RESULTS: Cerebellar tDCS did not significantly enhance language processing measured either immediately following treatment or at the 3-month follow-up. The effect sizes of tDCS over sham treatment were generally nil or small, except for the mean length of utterance on the picture description task, for which medium to large effects were observed.
CONCLUSION: These results may provide guidance for investigators who are planning larger trials of tDCS for individuals with chronic poststroke aphasia.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34074864      PMCID: PMC8186819          DOI: 10.1097/WNN.0000000000000270

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Behav Neurol        ISSN: 1543-3633            Impact factor:   1.590


  48 in total

Review 1.  tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: a meta-analytical review.

Authors:  Liron Jacobson; Meni Koslowsky; Michal Lavidor
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Are transcranial brain stimulation effects long-lasting in post-stroke aphasia? A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis on naming performance.

Authors:  Madalina Bucur; Costanza Papagno
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2019-05-08       Impact factor: 8.989

3.  Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in adults with aphasia after stroke.

Authors:  Bernhard Elsner; Joachim Kugler; Marcus Pohl; Jan Mehrholz
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-05-21

4.  Using transcranial direct-current stimulation to treat stroke patients with aphasia.

Authors:  Julie M Baker; Chris Rorden; Julius Fridriksson
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 7.914

5.  Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Does Not Improve Language Outcome in Subacute Poststroke Aphasia.

Authors:  Kerstin Spielmann; W Mieke E van de Sandt-Koenderman; Majanka H Heijenbrok-Kal; Gerard M Ribbers
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 6.  Mechanisms of aphasia recovery after stroke and the role of noninvasive brain stimulation.

Authors:  Roy H Hamilton; Evangelia G Chrysikou; Branch Coslett
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2011-04-02       Impact factor: 2.381

7.  Targeted transcranial direct current stimulation for rehabilitation after stroke.

Authors:  Jacek P Dmochowski; Abhishek Datta; Yu Huang; Jessica D Richardson; Marom Bikson; Julius Fridriksson; Lucas C Parra
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 8.  Restoring cognitive functions using non-invasive brain stimulation techniques in patients with cerebellar disorders.

Authors:  Paul A Pope; R Chris Miall
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 4.157

9.  Right Hemisphere Remapping of Naming Functions Depends on Lesion Size and Location in Poststroke Aphasia.

Authors:  Laura M Skipper-Kallal; Elizabeth H Lacey; Shihui Xing; Peter E Turkeltaub
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 3.599

10.  BDNF genotype and tDCS interaction in aphasia treatment.

Authors:  Julius Fridriksson; Jordan Elm; Brielle C Stark; Alexandra Basilakos; Chris Rorden; Souvik Sen; Mark S George; Michelle Gottfried; Leonardo Bonilha
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2018-08-18       Impact factor: 8.955

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Effects of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Patients with Stroke: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Li Hong-Yu; Zhang Zhi-Jie; Li Juan; Xiong Ting; He Wei-Chun; Zhu Ning
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2022-08-27       Impact factor: 3.648

2.  Cingulate transcranial direct current stimulation in adults with HIV.

Authors:  Xiong Jiang; Sophia Dahmani; Margarita Bronshteyn; Fan Nils Yang; John Paul Ryan; R Craig Gallagher; Srikanth R Damera; Princy N Kumar; David J Moore; Ronald J Ellis; Peter E Turkeltaub
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-03       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  Differential Behavioral and Neural Effects of Regional Cerebellar tDCS.

Authors:  Laura C Rice; Anila M D'Mello; Catherine J Stoodley
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2021-03-14       Impact factor: 3.590

4.  Timing of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with speech and language therapy (SLT) for aphasia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sameer A Ashaie; Samantha Engel; Leora R Cherney
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 2.728

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.