Download PDF
neuroreha 2018; 10(04): 167-172
DOI: 10.1055/a-0754-3214
Schwerpunkt
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Transkranielle elektrische Stimulation und ihre Bedeutung in der Neurorehabilitation

Friedhelm C. Hummel
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
07 December 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Jährlich treten ca. 1,5 Mio. neue Schlaganfälle in Europa auf. Trotz Weiterentwicklung der Akutbehandlung mit flächendeckenden Stroke Units, Thrombolyse und Thrombektomie und der postakuten Neurorehabilitation erholt sich immer noch nur ein Teil der Patienten. Seit etwas mehr als 10 Jahren wird transkranielle elektrische Stimulation eingesetzt, um residuale Funktion und funktionelle Erholung nach Schlaganfall zu verbessern. Der folgende Übersichtsartikel fokussiert auf Limitationen, Herausforderungen und Chancen dieser Methodik.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Antal A. et al. Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128 (09) 1774-1809
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Di Pino G. et al. Modulation of brain plasticity in stroke: A novel model for neurorehabilitation. Nat Rev Neurol 2014; 10: 597-608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Draaisma LR, Wessel MJ, Hummel FC. Non-invasive brain stimulation to enhancecognitive rehabilitation after stroke. Neurosci Lett. 06/2018
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Elsner B, Kugler J, Pohl M. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving function and activities of daily living in patients after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 11: CD009645
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Elsner B, Kugler J, Pohl M. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in patients with aphasia after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 5: CD009760
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Feigin VL. et al. Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990–2010: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet Lond Engl 2014; 383 (9913) 245-254
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Hummel FC, Cohen LG. Drivers of brain plasticity. Curr Opin Neurol 2005; 18: 667-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hummel F. et al. Effects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke. Brain 2005; 128: 490-499
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hummel FC, Cohen LG. Non-invasive brain stimulation: A new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke?. Lancet Neurol 2006; 5: 708-712
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Hummel FC. et al. Controversy: Noninvasive and invasive cortical stimulation show efficacy in treating stroke patients. Brain Stimulat 2008; 1: 370-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kang N, Summers JJ, Cauraugh JH. Transcranial direct current stimulationfacilitates motor learning post-stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J NeurolNeurosurg Psychiatry. 08/2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kashiwagi FT. et al. Noninvasive brain stimulations for unilateral spatial neglect after stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials. Neural Plast 2018; 2018 (Jun) 1-25
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Koch PJ, Hummel FC. Toward precision medicine: Tailoring interventional strategies based on noninvasive brain stimulation for motor recovery after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol 2017; 30 (04) 388-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Twisk JW. et al. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: A randomised trial. The Lancet 1999; 354 (9174) 191-196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lefaucheur JP. et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin Neurophysiol 2014; 125: 2150-2206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Lindenberg R, Renga V, Zhu LL. et al. Bihemispheric brain stimulation facilitates motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Neurology 2010; 75: 2176-2184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Marangolo P. The potential effects of transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS) on language functioning: Combining neuromodulation and behavioral intervention inaphasia. Neurosci Lett. 12/2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Morishita T, Hummel FC. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) in motor recovery after stroke: Concepts to increase efficacy. Curr Behav Neurosc Rep 2017; 4 (03) 280-289
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Nicolo P, Ptak R, Guggisberg AG. Variability of behavioural responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation: Origins and predictors. Neuropsychologia 2015; 74: 137-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 O’Brien AT, Bertolucci F, Torrealba-Acosta G. et al. Non-invasive brain stimulation for fine motor improvement after stroke: A meta-analysis. Eur J Neurol 2018; 25 (08) 1017-1026
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Opitz A, Windhoff M, Heidemann RM. et al. How the brain tissue shapes the electric field induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation. NeuroImage 2011; 58 (03) 849-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Opitz A, Yeagle E, Thielscher A. et al. On the importance of precise electrode placement for targeted transcranial electric stimulation. NeuroImage 2018; 181: 560-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Platz T. Repetitive transkranielle Magnetstimulation (rTMS) – eine Therapieoption für Schlaganfall-Betroffene?. Neuroreha 2018; 10 (04) 174-177
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Raffin E, Hummel FC. Restoring motor functions after stroke: Multiple approaches and opportunities. The Neuroscientist 2018; 24 (04) 400-416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Rocha S. et al. The impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) on upper limb function in chronic stroke: A double-blind randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil 2016; 38 (07) 653-660
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ruffini G, Fox MD, Ripolles O. et al. Optimization of multifocal transcranial current stimulation for weighted cortical pattern targeting from realistic modeling of electric fields. Neuroimage 89: 216-25 04/2014;
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Schulz R. et al. Parietofrontal motor pathways and their association with motor function after stroke. Brain 2015; 138: 1949-1960
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Schulz R. et al. Cortico-cerebellar structural connectivity is related toresidual motor output in chronic stroke. Cereb Cortex. 2017 DOI: doi:10.1093/cercor/bhv251
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Shaheiwola N, Zhang B, Jia J. et al. Using tDCS as an add-on treatment prior to FES therapy in improving upper limb function in severe chronic stroke patients: A randomized controlled study. Front Hum Neurosci 06/2018; 12
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Stagg CJ, Antal A, Nitsche MA. Physiology of transcranial direct current stimulation. J ECT 06/2018; 1
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 To WT, Hart J, De Ridder D. et al. Considering the influence of stimulation parameters on the effect of conventional and high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation. Expert Rev Med Devices 2016; 13 (04) 391-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Van de Winckel A, Carey JR, Bisson TA. et al. Home-based transcranial direct current stimulation plus tracking training therapy in people with stroke: An open-label feasibility study. J NeuroEngineering Rehabil 2018; 15 (01) 83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Winters C, van Wegen EEH, Daffertshofer A. et al. Generalizability of the proportional recovery model for the upper extremity after an ischemic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2015; 29 (07) 614-622
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar