on June 29, 2006
Published online before print June 29, 2006, doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000231390.58967.6b
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on January 21, 2006
From the Harvard Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (F.F., T.W., S.F., S.D.F., A.P.-L.); the Departments of Experimental Psychology (P.S.B.), Psychiatry (S.P.R.), and Pathology (A.C.V.), University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; Mackenzie University, Sao Paulo, Brazil (P.S.B., J.D., R.R.R., M.J.L.F.); the Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil (M.R.); and the Institut Guttmann (A.P.-L.), Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: ffregni{at}bidmc.harvard.edu.
Background and Purpose--It has been recently shown that a single session of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the unaffected hemisphere can improve motor function in stroke patients; however, this improvement is short-lasting. We therefore conducted a randomized, sham-controlled, phase II trial to evaluate whether five sessions of low-frequency rTMS can increase the magnitude and duration of these effects and whether this approach is safe. Methods--Fifteen patients with chronic stroke were randomized to receive active or sham rTMS of the unaffected hemisphere. A blinded rater assessed motor function and corticospinal excitability at baseline, during and after 2 weeks of treatment. Safety was assessed using a neuropsychologic battery and electroencephalogram. Results--Active rTMS resulted in a significant improvement of the motor function performance in the affected hand that lasted for 2 weeks. These effects were not observed in the sham rTMS group (affected and unaffected hand) and in the unaffected hand in the active rTMS group. Corticospinal excitability decreased in the stimulated, unaffected hemisphere and increased in the affected hemisphere. There was a significant correlation between motor function improvement and corticospinal excitability change in the affected hemisphere. Cognitive performance and electroencephalogram were not changed significantly throughout the trial in both groups of treatment. Conclusions--These results support and extend the findings of previous studies on rTMS in stroke patients because five consecutive sessions of rTMS increased the magnitude and duration of the motor effects. Furthermore, this increased dose of rTMS is not associated with cognitive adverse effects and/or epileptogenic activity.
Revised on February 15, 2006
Accepted on March 8, 2006
A Sham-Controlled Trial of a 5-Day Course of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Unaffected Hemisphere in Stroke Patients
Felipe Fregni MD, PhD*;
Key words: cerebrovascular accident • electrical stimulation of the brain • recovery of function • stroke
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  V. Di Lazzaro, P. Profice, F. Pilato, F. Capone, F. Ranieri, P. Pasqualetti, C. Colosimo, E. Pravata, A. Cianfoni, and M. Dileone Motor Cortex Plasticity Predicts Recovery in Acute Stroke Cereb Cortex, October 5, 2009; (2009) bhp216v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. A. Nowak, C. Grefkes, M. Ameli, and G. R. Fink Interhemispheric Competition After Stroke: Brain Stimulation to Enhance Recovery of Function of the Affected Hand Neurorehabil Neural Repair, September 1, 2009; 23(7): 641 - 656. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. Nyffeler, D. Cazzoli, C. W. Hess, and R. M. Muri One Session of Repeated Parietal Theta Burst Stimulation Trains Induces Long-Lasting Improvement of Visual Neglect Stroke, August 1, 2009; 40(8): 2791 - 2796. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. B. Plow, J. R. Carey, R. J. Nudo, and A. Pascual-Leone Invasive Cortical Stimulation to Promote Recovery of Function After Stroke: A Critical Appraisal Stroke, May 1, 2009; 40(5): 1926 - 1931. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Harvey, C. J. Winstein, and for the Everest Trial Group Design for the Everest Randomized Trial of Cortical Stimulation and Rehabilitation for Arm Function Following Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, January 1, 2009; 23(1): 32 - 44. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. M. Stinear, P. A. Barber, J. P. Coxon, M. K. Fleming, and W. D. Byblow Priming the motor system enhances the effects of upper limb therapy in chronic stroke Brain, May 1, 2008; 131(5): 1381 - 1390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. R. Carey, C. D. Evans, D. C. Anderson, E. Bhatt, A. Nagpal, T. J. Kimberley, and A. Pascual-Leone Safety of 6-Hz Primed Low-Frequency rTMS in Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, April 1, 2008; 22(2): 185 - 192. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Dechaumont-Palacin, P. Marque, X. De Boissezon, E. Castel-Lacanal, C. Carel, I. Berry, J. Pastor, J.F. Albucher, F. Chollet, and I. Loubinoux Neural Correlates of Proprioceptive Integration in the Contralesional Hemisphere of Very Impaired Patients Shortly After a Subcortical Stroke: An fMRI Study Neurorehabil Neural Repair, April 1, 2008; 22(2): 154 - 165. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. M. Pomeroy, G. Cloud, R. C. Tallis, C. Donaldson, V. Nayak, and S. Miller Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Muscle Contraction to Enhance Stroke Recovery: A Randomized Proof-of-Principle and Feasibility Investigation Neurorehabil Neural Repair, December 1, 2007; 21(6): 509 - 517. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. J Butler and S. L Wolf Putting the Brain on the Map: Use of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Assess and Induce Cortical Plasticity of Upper-Extremity Movement Physical Therapy, June 1, 2007; 87(6): 719 - 736. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Hotermans, P. Peigneux, G. Moonen, A. Maertens de Noordhout, and P. Maquet Therapeutic Use of High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Stroke Stroke, February 1, 2007; 38(2): 253 - 253. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|