TY - JOUR
T1 - Individualized Responses to Ipsilesional High-Frequency and Contralesional Low-Frequency rTMS in Chronic Stroke
T2 - A Pilot Study to Support the Individualization of Neuromodulation for Rehabilitation
AU - Kindred, John Harvey
AU - Wonsetler, Elizabeth Carr
AU - Charalambous, Charalambos Costas
AU - Srivastava, Shraddha
AU - Marebwa, Barbara Khalibinzwa
AU - Bonilha, Leonardo
AU - Kautz, Steven A.
AU - Bowden, Mark G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright © 2020 Kindred, Wonsetler, Charalambous, Srivastava, Marebwa, Bonilha, Kautz and Bowden.
PY - 2020/11/19
Y1 - 2020/11/19
N2 - Background: In this pilot study, we examined the effects of ipsilesional high-frequency rTMS (iHF-rTMS) and contralesional low-frequency rTMS (cLF-rTMS) applied via a double-cone coil on neurophysiological and gait variables in patients with chronic stroke. Objective/Hypothesis: To determine the group and individual level effects of two types of stimulation to better individualize neuromodulation for rehabilitation. Methods: Using a randomized, within-subject, double-blind, sham-controlled trial with 14 chronic stroke participants iHF-rTMS and cLF-rTMS were applied via a double-cone coil to the tibialis anterior cortical representation. Neurophysiological and gait variables were compared pre-post rTMS. Results: A small effect of cLF-rTMS indicated increased MEP amplitudes (Cohen’s D; cLF-rTMS, d = −0.30). Group-level analysis via RMANOVA showed no significant group effects of stimulation (P > 0.099). However, secondary analyses of individual data showed a high degree of response variability to rTMS. Individual percent changes in resting motor threshold and normalized MEP latency correlated with changes in gait propulsive forces and walking speed (iHF-rTMS, nLAT:Pp, R = 0.632 P = 0.015; cLF-rTMS, rMT:SSWS, R = −0.557, P = 0.039; rMT:Pp, R = 0.718, P = 0.004). Conclusions: Changes in propulsive forces and walking speed were seen in some individuals that showed neurophysiological changes in response to rTMS. The neurological consequences of stroke are heterogeneous making a “one type fits all” approach to neuromodulation for rehabilitation unlikely. This pilot study suggests that an individual’s unique response to rTMS should be considered before the application/selection of neuromodulatory therapies. Before neuromodulatory therapies can be incorporated into standard clinical practice, additional work is needed to identify biomarkers of response and how best to prescribe neuromodulation for rehabilitation for post-stroke gait.
AB - Background: In this pilot study, we examined the effects of ipsilesional high-frequency rTMS (iHF-rTMS) and contralesional low-frequency rTMS (cLF-rTMS) applied via a double-cone coil on neurophysiological and gait variables in patients with chronic stroke. Objective/Hypothesis: To determine the group and individual level effects of two types of stimulation to better individualize neuromodulation for rehabilitation. Methods: Using a randomized, within-subject, double-blind, sham-controlled trial with 14 chronic stroke participants iHF-rTMS and cLF-rTMS were applied via a double-cone coil to the tibialis anterior cortical representation. Neurophysiological and gait variables were compared pre-post rTMS. Results: A small effect of cLF-rTMS indicated increased MEP amplitudes (Cohen’s D; cLF-rTMS, d = −0.30). Group-level analysis via RMANOVA showed no significant group effects of stimulation (P > 0.099). However, secondary analyses of individual data showed a high degree of response variability to rTMS. Individual percent changes in resting motor threshold and normalized MEP latency correlated with changes in gait propulsive forces and walking speed (iHF-rTMS, nLAT:Pp, R = 0.632 P = 0.015; cLF-rTMS, rMT:SSWS, R = −0.557, P = 0.039; rMT:Pp, R = 0.718, P = 0.004). Conclusions: Changes in propulsive forces and walking speed were seen in some individuals that showed neurophysiological changes in response to rTMS. The neurological consequences of stroke are heterogeneous making a “one type fits all” approach to neuromodulation for rehabilitation unlikely. This pilot study suggests that an individual’s unique response to rTMS should be considered before the application/selection of neuromodulatory therapies. Before neuromodulatory therapies can be incorporated into standard clinical practice, additional work is needed to identify biomarkers of response and how best to prescribe neuromodulation for rehabilitation for post-stroke gait.
KW - brain stimulation
KW - corticomotor response
KW - gait rehabilitation
KW - neuromodulation for rehabilitation
KW - NM4R
KW - rehabilitation
KW - rTMS
KW - walking speed
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85097255021
U2 - 10.3389/fnhum.2020.578127
DO - 10.3389/fnhum.2020.578127
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85097255021
SN - 1662-5161
VL - 14
JO - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
JF - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
M1 - 578127
ER -