4.6 Article

Corticospinal Integrity and Motor Impairment Predict Outcomes After Excitatory Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Preliminary Study

期刊

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.08.014

关键词

Motor cortex; Prognosis; Rehabilitation; Stroke; Transcranial magnetic stimulation

资金

  1. Taipei Veterans General Hospital [V103C-168]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To identify the effective predictors for therapeutic outcomes based on intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS). Design: A sham-controlled, double-blind parallel study design. Setting: A tertiary hospital. Participants: People with stroke (N=72) who presented with unilateral hemiplegia. Interventions: Ten consecutive sessions of real or sham iTBS were implemented with the aim of enhancing hand function. Patients were categorized into 4 groups according to the presence (MEP+) or absence (MEP-) of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and grip strength according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale. Main Outcome Measures: Cortical excitability, Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), finger-tapping task (FT), and simple reaction time were performed before and after the sessions. Results: MEPs and the MRC scale were predictive of iTBS therapeutic outcomes. Group A (MEP+, MRC>1) exhibited the greatest WMFT change (7.6 +/- 2.3, P<.001), followed by group B (MEP-, MRC>1; 5.2 +/- 2.2 score change) and group C (MEP-, MRC = 0; 2.3 +/- 1.5 score change). These improvements were correlated significantly with baseline motor function and ipsilesional maximum MEP amplitude. Conclusions: The effectiveness of iTBS modulation for poststroke motor enhancement depends on baseline hand grip strength and the presence of MEPs. Our findings indicate that establishing neurostimulation strategies based on the proposed electrophysiological and clinical criteria can allow iTBS to be executed with substantial precision. Effective neuromodulatory strategies can be formulated by using electrophysiological features and clinical presentation information as guidelines. (C) 2015 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据