Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2023
Multifocal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Primary Progressive Aphasia Does Not Provide a Clinical Benefit Over Speech Therapy.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Borrego-Écija Sergi, Montagut Nuria, Martín-Trias Pablo, Vaqué-Alcázar Lídia, Illán-Gala Ignacio, Balasa Mircea, Lladó Albert, Casanova-Mollà Jordi, Bargalló Nuria, Valls-Solé Josep, Lleó Alberto, Bartrés-Faz David, Sánchez-Valle Raquel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a group of neurodegenerative disorders including Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia characterized by language deterioration. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive intervention for brain dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of tDCS combined with speech therapy in the three variants of PPA. We evaluate changes in fMRI activity in a subset of patients.
METHODS: Double-blinded, randomized, cross-over, and sham-controlled tDCS study. 15 patients with PPA were included. Each patient underwent two interventions: a) speech therapy + active tDCS and b) speech therapy + sham tDCS stimulation. A multifocal strategy with anodes placed in the left frontal and parietal regions was used to stimulate the entire language network. Efficacy was evaluated by comparing the results of two independent sets of neuropsychological assessments administered at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at 1 month and 3 months after the intervention. In a subsample, fMRI scanning was performed before and after each intervention.
RESULTS: The interventions were well tolerated. Participants in both arms showed clinical improvement, but no differences were found between active and sham tDCS interventions in any of the evaluations. There were trends toward better outcomes in the active tDCS group for semantic association and reading skills. fMRI identified an activity increase in the right frontal medial cortex and the bilateral paracingulate gyrus after the active tDCS intervention.
CONCLUSION: We did not find differences between active and sham tDCS stimulation in clinical scores of language function in PPA patients.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of tDCS combined with speech therapy in the three variants of PPA. We evaluate changes in fMRI activity in a subset of patients.
METHODS: Double-blinded, randomized, cross-over, and sham-controlled tDCS study. 15 patients with PPA were included. Each patient underwent two interventions: a) speech therapy + active tDCS and b) speech therapy + sham tDCS stimulation. A multifocal strategy with anodes placed in the left frontal and parietal regions was used to stimulate the entire language network. Efficacy was evaluated by comparing the results of two independent sets of neuropsychological assessments administered at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at 1 month and 3 months after the intervention. In a subsample, fMRI scanning was performed before and after each intervention.
RESULTS: The interventions were well tolerated. Participants in both arms showed clinical improvement, but no differences were found between active and sham tDCS interventions in any of the evaluations. There were trends toward better outcomes in the active tDCS group for semantic association and reading skills. fMRI identified an activity increase in the right frontal medial cortex and the bilateral paracingulate gyrus after the active tDCS intervention.
CONCLUSION: We did not find differences between active and sham tDCS stimulation in clinical scores of language function in PPA patients.