Intermittent theta burst stimulation applied during early rehabilitation after stroke: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Lukas Hensel, Christian Grefkes, Caroline Tscherpel, Corinna Ringmaier, Daria Kraus, Stefanie Hamacher, Lukas J Volz, Gereon R Fink, Lukas Hensel, Christian Grefkes, Caroline Tscherpel, Corinna Ringmaier, Daria Kraus, Stefanie Hamacher, Lukas J Volz, Gereon R Fink

Abstract

Introduction: Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) applied to primary motor cortex (M1) has been shown to modulate both the excitability and connectivity of the motor system. A recent proof-of-principle study, based on a small group of hospitalised patients with acute ischemic stroke, suggested that iTBS applied to the ipsilesional M1 combined with physical therapy early after stroke can amplify motor recovery with lasting after effects. A randomised controlled clinical trial using a double-blind design is warranted to justify the implementation of iTBS-assisted motor rehabilitation in neurorehabilitation from an acute ischaemic stroke.

Methods/design: We investigate the effects of daily iTBS on early motor rehabilitation after stroke in an investigator-initiated, longitudinal randomised controlled trial. Patients (n=150) with hemiparesis receive either iTBS (600 pulses) applied to the ipsilesional motor cortex (M1) or a control stimulation (ie, coil placement over the parieto-occipital vertex in parallel to the interhemispheric fissure and with a tilt of 45°). On 8 consecutive workdays, a 45 min arm-centred motor training follows the intervention . The relative grip strength, defined as the grip force ratios of the affected and unaffected hands, serves as the primary outcome parameter. Secondary outcome parameters are measures of arm function (Action Research Arm Test, Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale), stroke severity (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), stroke-induced disability (modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index), duration of inpatient rehabilitation, quality of life (EuroQol 5D), motor evoked potentials and the resting motor threshold of the ipsilesional M1.

Ethics and dissemination: The study was approved by the Ethics Commission of the Medical Faculty, University of Cologne, Germany (reference number 15-343). Data will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences. Study title: Theta-Burst Stimulation in Early Rehabilitation after Stroke (acronym: TheSiReS). Study registration at German Registry for Clinical Trials (DRKS00008963) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02910024).

Keywords: TMS; hemiparesis; iTBS; motor recovery; rehabilitation.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of study procedure. iTBS, Intermittent theta burst stimulation.

References

    1. Feigin VL, Forouzanfar MH, Krishnamurthi R, et al. . Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990–2010: findings from the global burden of disease study 2010. The Lancet 2014;383:245–55. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61953-4
    1. Saver JL, Goyal M, Bonafe A, et al. . Stent-retriever thrombectomy after intravenous t-PA vs. t-PA alone in stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2285–95. 10.1056/NEJMoa1415061
    1. Gresham GE, Fitzpatrick TE, Wolf PA, et al. . Residual disability in survivors of stroke — the Framingham study. N Engl J Med 1975;293:954–6. 10.1056/NEJM197511062931903
    1. Carod-Artal J, Egido JA, González JL, et al. . Quality of life among stroke survivors evaluated 1 year after stroke: experience of a stroke unit. Stroke 2000;31:2995–3000.
    1. Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol 2008;63:272–87. 10.1002/ana.21393
    1. Nudo RJ. Recovery after brain injury: mechanisms and principles. Front Hum Neurosci 2013;7:887 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00887
    1. Chollet F, Dipiero V, Wise RJS, et al. . The functional anatomy of motor recovery after stroke in humans: a study with positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol 1991;29:63–71. 10.1002/ana.410290112
    1. Ward NS, et al. Neural correlates of motor recovery after stroke: a longitudinal fMRI study. Brain 2003;126:2476–96. 10.1093/brain/awg245
    1. Grefkes C, Nowak DA, Eickhoff SB, et al. . Cortical connectivity after subcortical stroke assessed with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol 2008;63:236–46. 10.1002/ana.21228
    1. Rehme AK, Volz LJ, Feis D-L, et al. . Individual prediction of chronic motor outcome in the acute post-stroke stage: behavioral parameters versus functional imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 2015;36:4553–65. 10.1002/hbm.22936
    1. Rehme AK, Eickhoff SB, Rottschy C, et al. . Activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of motor-related neural activity after stroke. Neuroimage 2012;59:2771–82. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.023
    1. Volz LJ, Hamada M, Rothwell JC, et al. . What makes the muscle twitch: motor system connectivity and TMS-Induced activity. Cerebral Cortex (Published Online First: 7 March 2014).
    1. Pennisi G, et al. Transcranial magnetic stimulation after pure motor stroke. Clin Neurophysiol 2002;113:1536–43. 10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00255-9
    1. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Petoe M, et al. . The PreP algorithm predicts potential for upper limb recovery after stroke. Brain 2012;135:2527–35. 10.1093/brain/aws146
    1. Maulden SA, Gassaway J, Horn SD, et al. . Timing of initiation of rehabilitation after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:34–40. 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.08.119
    1. Pollock A, Farmer SE, Brady MC, et al. . Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;23 10.1002/14651858.CD010820.pub2
    1. Pin-Barre C, plasticity JLN. Physical exercise as a diagnostic, rehabilitation, and preventive tool: influence on neuroplasticity and motor recovery after stroke. Hindawicom 2015.
    1. Grefkes C, Fink GR. Disruption of motor network connectivity post-stroke and its noninvasive neuromodulation. Curr Opin Neurol 2012;25:670–5. 10.1097/WCO.0b013e3283598473
    1. Grefkes C, Fink GR. Noninvasive brain stimulation after stroke: it is time for large randomized controlled trials! Curr Opin Neurol 2016;29:714–20. 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000395
    1. Hummel FC, Cohen LG. Non-Invasive brain stimulation: a new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke? Lancet Neurol 2006;5:708–12. 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70525-7
    1. Ziemann U. Improving disability in stroke with rTMS. Lancet Neurol 2005;4:454–5. 10.1016/S1474-4422(05)70126-5
    1. Nettekoven C, Volz LJ, Kutscha M, et al. . Dose-Dependent effects of theta burst rTMS on cortical excitability and resting-state connectivity of the human motor system. J Neurosci 2014;34:6849–59. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4993-13.2014
    1. Volz LJ, Rehme AK, Michely J, et al. . Shaping early reorganization of neural networks promotes motor function after stroke. Cerebral Cortex 2016;26:2882–94. 10.1093/cercor/bhw034
    1. Ameli M, Grefkes C, Kemper F, et al. . Differential effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over ipsilesional primary motor cortex in cortical and subcortical middle cerebral artery stroke. Ann Neurol 2009;66:298–309. 10.1002/ana.21725
    1. Khedr EM, Ahmed MA, Fathy N, et al. . Therapeutic trial of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation after acute ischemic stroke. Neurology 2005;65:466–8. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000173067.84247.36
    1. Ackerley SJ, Stinear CM, Barber PA, et al. . Combining theta burst stimulation with training after subcortical stroke. Stroke 2010;41:1568–72. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.583278
    1. Talelli P, Wallace A, Dileone M, et al. . Theta burst stimulation in the rehabilitation of the upper limb: a semirandomized, placebo-controlled trial in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012;26:976–87.
    1. Reis J, Robertson EM, Krakauer JW, et al. . Consensus: can transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation enhance motor learning and memory formation? Brain Stimul 2008;1:363–9. 10.1016/j.brs.2008.08.001
    1. Volz LJ, Grefkes C. Basic principles of rTMS in motor recovery after stroke. Therapeutic rTMS in Neurology 2016:23–37.
    1. Hsu W-Y, Cheng C-H, Liao K-K, et al. . Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor functions in patients with stroke. Stroke 2012;43:1849–57. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.649756
    1. Adeyemo BO, Simis M, Macea DD, et al. . Systematic review of parameters of stimulation, clinical trial design characteristics, and motor outcomes in non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke. Front Psychiatry 2012;3 10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00088
    1. Hao Z, Wang D, Zeng Y, et al. . Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for improving function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;78.
    1. Harvey RL, Edwards D, Dunning K, et al. . Randomized sham-controlled trial of Navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor recovery in stroke. Stroke 2018;49:2138–46. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.020607
    1. Buma F, Kwakkel G, Ramsey N. Understanding upper limb recovery after stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2013;31:707–22. 10.3233/RNN-130332
    1. Rehme AK, Volz LJ, Feis D-L, et al. . Identifying neuroimaging markers of motor disability in acute stroke by machine learning techniques. Cerebral Cortex 2015;25:3046–56. 10.1093/cercor/bhu100
    1. Rehme AK, Fink GR, von Cramon DY, et al. . The role of the contralesional motor cortex for motor recovery in the early days after stroke assessed with longitudinal fMRI. Cerebral Cortex 2011;21:756–68. 10.1093/cercor/bhq140
    1. Rehme AK, Eickhoff SB, Wang LE, et al. . Dynamic causal modeling of cortical activity from the acute to the chronic stage after stroke. Neuroimage 2011;55:1147–58. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.01.014
    1. Huang Y-Z, Edwards MJ, Rounis E, et al. . Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex. Neuron 2005;45:201–6. 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.033
    1. Di Lazzaro V, Profice P, Pilato F, et al. . Motor cortex plasticity predicts recovery in acute stroke. Cerebral Cortex 2010;20:1523–8. 10.1093/cercor/bhp216
    1. Cárdenas-Morales L, Volz LJ, Michely J, et al. . Network connectivity and individual responses to brain stimulation in the human motor system. Cerebral Cortex 2014;24:1697–707. 10.1093/cercor/bht023
    1. Nettekoven C, Volz LJ, Leimbach M, et al. . Inter-Individual variability in cortical excitability and motor network connectivity following multiple blocks of rTMS. Neuroimage 2015;118:209–18. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.06.004
    1. Diekhoff-Krebs S, Pool E-M, Sarfeld A-S, et al. . Interindividual differences in motor network connectivity and behavioral response to iTBS in stroke patients. Neuroimage 2017;15:559–71. 10.1016/j.nicl.2017.06.006
    1. Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, et al. . Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol 2009;120:2008–39. 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016
    1. Gentner R, Wankerl K, Reinsberger C, et al. . Depression of human corticospinal excitability induced by magnetic theta-burst stimulation: evidence of rapid polarity-reversing metaplasticity. Cerebral Cortex 2008;18:2046–53. 10.1093/cercor/bhm239
    1. Wassermann EM. Risk and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: report and suggested guidelines from the International workshop on the safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1998;38:1–16.
    1. Rossini PM, Burke D, Chen R, et al. . Non-Invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord, roots and peripheral nerves: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical and research application. An updated report from an I.F.C.N. Committee. Clin Neurophysiol 2015;126:1071–107. 10.1016/j.clinph.2015.02.001
    1. Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, et al. . Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987;50:714–9. 10.1136/jnnp.50.6.714
    1. Ward NS, Newton JM, Swayne OBC, et al. . The relationship between brain activity and peak grip force is modulated by corticospinal system integrity after subcortical stroke. Eur J Neurosci 2007;25:1865–73. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05434.x
    1. Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res 1981;4:483–92. 10.1097/00004356-198112000-00001
    1. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääskö L, Leyman I, et al. . The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 1975;7:13–31.
    1. Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60: I. General considerations. Scott Med J 1957;2:127–36. 10.1177/003693305700200401
    1. Bembenek JP, Kurczych K, Karli Nski M, et al. . The prognostic value of motor-evoked potentials in motor recovery and functional outcome after stroke − a systematic review of the literature. Funct Neurol 2012;27:79–84.
    1. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ. Predicting activities after stroke: what is clinically relevant? Int J Stroke 2013;8:25–32. 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00967.x

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe