将 TMS 和 tDCS 作为治疗帕金森病认知障碍的潜在工具:一项荟萃分析。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurological Sciences Pub Date : 2024-09-25 DOI:10.1007/s10072-024-07778-0
Andreina Giustiniani, Lorenza Maistrello, Valentina Mologni, Laura Danesin, Francesca Burgio
{"title":"将 TMS 和 tDCS 作为治疗帕金森病认知障碍的潜在工具:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Andreina Giustiniani, Lorenza Maistrello, Valentina Mologni, Laura Danesin, Francesca Burgio","doi":"10.1007/s10072-024-07778-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive deficits are common nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) could be a potential aid to prevent or delay dementia progression in this clinical population. However, previous studies reported controversial results concerning their efficacy on cognitive symptoms of PD. Hence, the present meta-analysis aims to systematically examine the effects of NIBS as possible treatments for PD cognitive impairments. Understanding NIBS' impact on these symptoms may be of outstanding importance to implement new therapeutic strategies and improve the patients' quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>EMBASE, Scopus, and PubMed databases were systematically searched for consecutive studies published from 2000 to March 2023 describing Randomized Controlled Trials studies evaluating the effect of NIBS on PD cognitive symptoms. From the included studies, data concerning neuropsychological tests were extracted and grouped into six cognitive domains, separately analyzed. Hedge's method was computed as the effect size measure of the extracted data; heterogeneity among studies and publication bias were also assessed. The Cochrane's RoB2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias for each of the included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After database searching and screening of texts, sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. No significant results emerged from any investigated cognitive domain when comparing NIBS and sham treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Several factors may have contributed to the lack of effects; among these, methodological choices, the small sample of studies, the high heterogeneity of data and stimulation protocols pose the need for more controlled studies to highlight the potentiality of NIBS as a future treatment for PD cognitive impairments.</p>","PeriodicalId":19191,"journal":{"name":"Neurological Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"TMS and tDCS as potential tools for the treatment of cognitive deficits in Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Andreina Giustiniani, Lorenza Maistrello, Valentina Mologni, Laura Danesin, Francesca Burgio\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10072-024-07778-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive deficits are common nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) could be a potential aid to prevent or delay dementia progression in this clinical population. However, previous studies reported controversial results concerning their efficacy on cognitive symptoms of PD. Hence, the present meta-analysis aims to systematically examine the effects of NIBS as possible treatments for PD cognitive impairments. Understanding NIBS' impact on these symptoms may be of outstanding importance to implement new therapeutic strategies and improve the patients' quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>EMBASE, Scopus, and PubMed databases were systematically searched for consecutive studies published from 2000 to March 2023 describing Randomized Controlled Trials studies evaluating the effect of NIBS on PD cognitive symptoms. From the included studies, data concerning neuropsychological tests were extracted and grouped into six cognitive domains, separately analyzed. Hedge's method was computed as the effect size measure of the extracted data; heterogeneity among studies and publication bias were also assessed. The Cochrane's RoB2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias for each of the included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After database searching and screening of texts, sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. No significant results emerged from any investigated cognitive domain when comparing NIBS and sham treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Several factors may have contributed to the lack of effects; among these, methodological choices, the small sample of studies, the high heterogeneity of data and stimulation protocols pose the need for more controlled studies to highlight the potentiality of NIBS as a future treatment for PD cognitive impairments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07778-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07778-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:认知障碍是帕金森病(PD)常见的非运动症状。非侵入性脑部刺激疗法(NIBS)是预防或延缓帕金森病患者痴呆症进展的潜在辅助疗法。然而,之前的研究报告对 NIBS 对帕金森病认知症状的疗效存在争议。因此,本荟萃分析旨在系统研究 NIBS 作为治疗帕金森病认知障碍的可能疗法的效果。了解 NIBS 对这些症状的影响可能对实施新的治疗策略和改善患者的生活质量具有重要意义:方法:在 EMBASE、Scopus 和 PubMed 数据库中系统检索了 2000 年至 2023 年 3 月间发表的连续性研究,这些研究描述了评估 NIBS 对 PD 认知症状影响的随机对照试验研究。从纳入的研究中提取了有关神经心理学测试的数据,并将其分为六个认知领域,分别进行分析。对提取的数据计算效应大小,并评估研究间的异质性和发表偏倚。Cochrane's RoB2 工具用于评估每项纳入研究的偏倚风险:经过数据库搜索和文本筛选,16 项研究符合纳入标准。在对 NIBS 和假治疗进行比较时,在任何调查的认知领域都没有出现明显的结果:结论:多种因素可能导致了研究效果不明显,其中包括方法学选择、研究样本较少、数据和刺激方案的高度异质性,因此需要进行更多的对照研究,以凸显NIBS作为未来治疗帕金森病认知障碍的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
TMS and tDCS as potential tools for the treatment of cognitive deficits in Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis.

Background: Cognitive deficits are common nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) could be a potential aid to prevent or delay dementia progression in this clinical population. However, previous studies reported controversial results concerning their efficacy on cognitive symptoms of PD. Hence, the present meta-analysis aims to systematically examine the effects of NIBS as possible treatments for PD cognitive impairments. Understanding NIBS' impact on these symptoms may be of outstanding importance to implement new therapeutic strategies and improve the patients' quality of life.

Methods: EMBASE, Scopus, and PubMed databases were systematically searched for consecutive studies published from 2000 to March 2023 describing Randomized Controlled Trials studies evaluating the effect of NIBS on PD cognitive symptoms. From the included studies, data concerning neuropsychological tests were extracted and grouped into six cognitive domains, separately analyzed. Hedge's method was computed as the effect size measure of the extracted data; heterogeneity among studies and publication bias were also assessed. The Cochrane's RoB2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias for each of the included studies.

Results: After database searching and screening of texts, sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. No significant results emerged from any investigated cognitive domain when comparing NIBS and sham treatments.

Conclusion: Several factors may have contributed to the lack of effects; among these, methodological choices, the small sample of studies, the high heterogeneity of data and stimulation protocols pose the need for more controlled studies to highlight the potentiality of NIBS as a future treatment for PD cognitive impairments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurological Sciences
Neurological Sciences 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.00%
发文量
743
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: Neurological Sciences is intended to provide a medium for the communication of results and ideas in the field of neuroscience. The journal welcomes contributions in both the basic and clinical aspects of the neurosciences. The official language of the journal is English. Reports are published in the form of original articles, short communications, editorials, reviews and letters to the editor. Original articles present the results of experimental or clinical studies in the neurosciences, while short communications are succinct reports permitting the rapid publication of novel results. Original contributions may be submitted for the special sections History of Neurology, Health Care and Neurological Digressions - a forum for cultural topics related to the neurosciences. The journal also publishes correspondence book reviews, meeting reports and announcements.
期刊最新文献
Idiopathic extracranial internal carotid artery vasospasm: case report and systematic review. Correction to: Effectiveness of combined robotics and virtual reality on lower limb functional ability in stroke survivors: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Aberrant functional connectivity associated with drug response in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. A non-linear relationship between blood pressure and mild cognitive impairment in elderly individuals: A cohort study based on the Chinese longitudinal healthy longevity survey (CLHLS). Alterations in spatiotemporal characteristics of dynamic networks in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1