PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 17102691

Does brain stimulation after stroke have a future?

Penelope Talelli·John Rothwell
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Transcranial methods of cortical stimulation can induce long-term changes in excitability of the cerebral cortex in humans and may be useful as therapeutic interventions in stroke rehabilitation. RECENT FINDINGS: Two approaches have been tested: (1) increasing excitability of the cortex in the stroke hemisphere and (2) suppression of the non-stroke hemisphere to reduce potential interference with function of the stroke hemisphere. The interventions have been transcranial direct current stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation and implanted epidural stimulation. All have been reported to give 10-20% functional improvement in small numbers of patients in single-session studies as well as in a small number of longer-term therapeutic trials. Preliminary experiments in aphasic patients using transcranial magnetic stimulation in an interference design show, however, that stimulation of the nonstroke hemisphere can in some patients reduce verbal fluency, questioning the general applicability of the second approach. SUMMARY: Cortical stimulation appears to be a safe and promising intervention for stroke patients. More studies are needed to assess its long-term benefits on substantial numbers of patients. We need to know what type of intervention is best, which patients are likely to benefit, the optimum time to intervene and the duration of any benefits.

Explore related subjects

AphasiaCerebral CortexElectric Stimulation TherapyHumansParesisPerceptual DisordersRecovery of FunctionStrokeStroke RehabilitationTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTreatment OutcomeJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Penelope Talelli, John Rothwell. 2006. Does brain stimulation after stroke have a future?. https://doi.org/10.1097/wco.0b013e32801080d1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Delayed cerebral vasospasm secondary to bacterial meningitis after lumbosacral spinal surgery: case report.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed cerebral vasospasm is an under-recognized complication of meningitis. This case report is important because it is the first to definitively associate vasospasm with meningitis using catheter angiography. Furthermore, it is the first to correlate the time course of delayed cerebral vasospasm with meningitis. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: We present a patient who developed a partial expressive aphasia 9 days after developing meningitis, consistent with cerebral vasospasm, after lumbosacral spinal surgery. INTERVENTION: Vasospasm was confirmed by angiography and transcranial Doppler sonography, and symptoms responded to hypervolemia, hypertension, and hemodilution therapy. CONCLUSION: If a patient develops neurological symptoms consistent with a timeline of delayed cerebral vasospasm in the setting of meningitis, angiographic evaluation and appropriate therapy should be pursued.

Aphasia↗
PubMed2006

Stimulating language: insights from TMS.

Fifteen years ago, Pascual-Leone and colleagues used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to investigate speech production in pre-surgical epilepsy patients and in doing so, introduced a novel tool into language research. TMS can be used to non-invasively stimulate a specific cortical region and transiently disrupt information processing. These 'virtual lesion' studies offer not only the ability to explore causal relations between brain regions and language functions absent in functional neuroimaging, but also spatial and temporal precision not typically available in patient studies. For instance, TMS has been used to demonstrate functionally distinct sub-regions of the left inferior frontal gyrus; to clarify the relationship between pre-morbid language organization and susceptibility to unilateral lesions and to investigate the contribution of both left and right hemisphere language areas in recovery from aphasia. When TMS is used as a measure of functional connectivity, it demonstrates a close link between action words and motor programmes; it suggests a potential evolutionary link between hand gestures and language and it suggests a role in speech perception for the motor system underlying speech production. In combination with functional neuroimaging, it can elucidate the circuits responsible for this involvement. Finally, TMS may even be useful for enhancing recovery in aphasic patients. In other words, TMS has already become an important tool for studying language at both the cognitive and neural levels, and it is clear that further developments in TMS methodology are likely to result in even greater opportunities for language research.

Aphasia↗
PubMed2006

Language rehabilitation in chronic aphasia and time postonset: a review of single-subject data.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This article is a comprehensive review of aphasia treatment studies for the purpose of investigating the relationship between time postonset of aphasia and response to treatment for aphasia in chronic patients at >/=1 year after symptom onset. METHODS: Studies that demonstrated treatment response (defined as a measurable change in task performance compared with a control task performance) through the use of single-subject design methodologies on measures of verbal output or auditory comprehension were selected. Individual subject data were extracted from the 23 studies that met criteria identifying the subjects as those who received direct continuous therapy for spoken language deficits and whose changes in response to therapy were measurable. Percent of maximum possible change was used as a measurement of outcome. RESULTS: Nonparametric correlation statistics (Spearman rho) and comparisons of group means (Kruskal-Wallis) were used to compare the relationship between time postonset and improvement. Time postonset at which treatment was initiated did not correlate with response to treatment. No significant differences in response to treatment were found between groups of patients according to times postonset. CONCLUSIONS: Time postonset is not related to response to treatment for aphasia in patients >1 year postonset of aphasia.

Aphasia↗