These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: M1 and Cerebellar tDCS for MSA-C: a Double-Blind, Randomized, Sham-Controlled, Crossover Study.
    Author: Ahn JH, Lee D, Kim M, Cho JW, Chang WH, Youn J.
    Journal: Cerebellum; 2023 Jun; 22(3):386-393. PubMed ID: 35624201.
    Abstract:
    The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for cerebellar-dominant multiple-system atrophy (MSA-C) is not well elucidated, yet. This study aimed to investigate the effect of tDCS on the primary motor cortex (M1) and cerebellum in patients with MSA-C. We recruited probable MSA-C patients and performed three single sessions of tDCS at each visit in random order (M1, cerebellum or sham). Cerebellar ataxia was evaluated with the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS) and objective gait and static balance analyses both before and after each stimulation session. Additionally, we also evaluated the factors related with objective improvement from each stimulation. Sixteen participants were enrolled, and one dropped out after 2 sessions of stimulation due to consent withdrawal. The gait velocity, step time and single support time all significantly improved after the M1 and cerebellar tDCS treatment compared with the sham stimulation while there was no difference in the improvement of ICARS and posturography results among 3 stimulations. In terms of the related factors with improvement of gait velocity, the disease duration, baseline gait speed and single support times were correlated after M1 stimulation, while a higher ICARS score and baseline gait speed in cerebellar stimulation. There were no adverse effects reported after the tDCS sessions. Our results demonstrated that both M1 and cerebellar tDCS demonstrated benefits for MSA-C patients without significant complications. Considering the different related factors with improvement at each stimulation, the mechanism would be different between M1 and cerebellar stimulations.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]