Non-invasive brain stimulation for the lower limb after stroke: what do we know so far and what should we be doing next?

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (7) ◽  
pp. 714-720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie K. Fleming ◽  
Marousa Pavlou ◽  
Di J. Newham ◽  
Laszlo Sztriha ◽  
James T. Teo
Keyword(s):  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Non Invasive

Non-invasive brain stimulation to assess neurophysiologic underpinnings of lower limb motor impairment in multiple sclerosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 356 ◽  
pp. 109143
Author(s):  
Clayton W. Swanson ◽  
Felix Proessl ◽  
Jaclyn A. Stephens ◽  
Augusto A. Miravalle ◽  
Brett W. Fling
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Motor Impairment ◽  
Non Invasive

scholarly journals Effect of non-invasive brain stimulation on lower limb function in patients after stroke: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 501-508
Author(s):  
Xueyi Ni ◽  
Liru Cui ◽  
Ruixia Bi ◽  
Jinghua Qian
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Motor Function ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Walking Speed ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
P Value ◽  
Limb Function ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Lower Limb Function

Background: In recent years, it is reported that non-invasive brain stimulation [including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)] could improve lower limb function in patients after stroke. However, some studies showed no effect. In the present study, we aimed to make a meta-analysis to assess effect of non-invasive brain stimulation on lower limb function in patients after stroke. Methods: Studies exploring the effect of tDCS or rTMS on lower limb function in patients after stroke were searched on the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, Google Scholar before March 2021. Meta-analysis was made to summarize results of these studies. Results: The present study showed significantly better walking speed, mobility and muscle strength increase effect in tDCS group compared to sham tDCS group [walking speed: standard mean difference (SMD) = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.48 to 1.80, I2 = 74.0%, p value for Q test < 0.001; mobility: SMD = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.21 to 1.36, I2 = 53.8%, p value for Q test = 0.043; muscle strength: SMD = 2.79, 95% CI = 0.61 to 4.98, I2 = 93.9%, p value for Q test < 0.001]. In addition, meta-analysis showed significantly better walking speed, balance and motor function increase effect in rTMS group compared to sham rTMS group [walking speed: SMD = 3.31, 95% CI = 1.38 to 5.24, I2 = 92.1%, p value for Q test < 0.001; balance: SMD = 3.54, 95% CI = 1.45 to 5.63, I2 = 95.4%, p value for Q test < 0.001; motor function: SMD = 1.65, 95% CI = 0.53 to 2.76, I2 = 90.3%, p value for Q test < 0.001]. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggested that non-invasive brain stimulation improved lower limb function in patients after stroke. More large scale, blinded RCTs were necessary to confirm the effect of rTMS and tDCS on lower limb function in patients after stroke.

Investigations into the Clinical Utility of Latex D-Dimer in the Diagnosis of Deep Venous Thrombosis

1993 ◽  
Vol 69 (01) ◽  
pp. 008-011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cedric J Carter ◽  
D Lynn Doyle ◽  
Nigel Dawson ◽  
Shauna Fowler ◽  
Dana V Devine
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Deep Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Fibrin Degradation Product ◽  
Current Form ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
D Dimer

SummaryThe serial use of non-invasive tests has been shown to be a safe method of managing outpatients who are suspected of having lower limb deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Objective testing has shown that the majority of these outpatients do not have venous thrombosis. A rapid test to exclude DVT in these patients, without the need for expensive and inconvenient serial non-invasive vascular testing, would have practical and economic advantages.Studies measuring the fibrin degradation product D-dimer using enzyme-linked immunoassays (EIA) in patients with veno-graphically proven DVT suggest that it should be possible to exclude this condition by the use of one of the rapid latex bead D-dimer tests.We have examined 190 patients with suspected DVT using both a latex and an EIA D-dimer assay. The latex D-dimer test used in this study was negative in 7 of the 36 proven cases of DVT. This sensitivity of only 80% is not sufficient to allow this type of assay, in its current form, to be used as an exclusion test for DVT. The same plasma samples were tested with an EIA assay. This information was used to mathematically model the effects of selecting a range of D-dimer discriminant cut off points for the diagnosis of DVT. These results indicate that 62% of suspected clinically significant DVT could have this diagnosis excluded, with a 98% sensitivity, if the rapid latex or equivalent D-dimer test could be reformulated to measure less than 185 ng/ml of D-dimer.

In Vivo Wireless Brain Stimulation via Non-invasive and Targeted Delivery of Magnetoelectric Nanoparticles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler Nguyen ◽  
Jianhua Gao ◽  
Ping Wang ◽  
Abhignyan Nagesetti ◽  
Peter Andrews ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Targeted Delivery ◽  
Non Invasive
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document