Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Naming Disorders in Poststroke Aphasia: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in treating naming disorders in patients with poststroke aphasia through a meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: This systematic review includes randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from 4 databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed, with the search period extending from database inception to July 22, 2024. STUDY SELECTION: We included RCTs examining the effects of tDCS on naming ability in patients with poststroke aphasic. Two authors independently searched and screened the literature and assessed studies for compliance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria by reviewing titles, abstracts, and full texts. Any disagreements were resolved by consultation with the other authors. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted relevant data (sociodemographic characteristics, clinical information, study characteristics, stimulus parameters, and outcome indicators) from eligible studies and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool II. When discrepancies arose, they were resolved by another experienced researcher. DATA SYNTHESIS: We used Review Manager 5.4 software for data analysis. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI were used for meta-analysis. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024586289). A total of 12 studies involving 400 subjects were included. tDCS significantly improved the naming abilities of participants with poststroke aphasia (SMD=0.25; 95% CI=[0.05-0.45], P=.01), particularly in those with chronic stroke (SMD=0.48, 95% CI=[0.10-0.86], P=.01). Anodal tDCS stimulation demonstrated a statistically significant effect on the recovery of naming functions (SMD=0.25, P =.02). CONCLUSIONS: Anodal tDCS could positively impact the naming abilities of patients with poststroke aphasia, particularly those with chronic stroke. Because of the methodological limitations of the included studies, it is worthwhile to further evaluate the value of tDCS in RCTs in future research.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.