Advertisement

rTMS in Visual Hemineglect After Stroke

  • René M. MüriEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter presents an overview of the literature of clinical application of TMS in the treatment of visual hemineglect. Eleven studies were found. In general, inhibitory protocols (low-frequency repetitive TMS, rTMS, or continuous theta burst stimulation, cTBS) were used to stimulate the contralesional intact hemisphere. The quality of evidence of the different studies is heterogeneous ranging from single case reports to randomized, blinded, and sham-controlled studies. Repetitive TMS is safe; no serious side effects were reported. There is a clear advantage for the use of inhibitory rTMS protocols such as cTBS. At the moment, a week recommendation based on the GRADE system is given for cTBS protocols with repeated daily applications as described in the study of Cazzoli et al. (Brain 135:3426–3439, 2012). This protocol has also a low burden for the patient due to the short duration of the stimulation and the duration of the whole therapy limited to 2 days. The effects on visual hemineglect are long lasting, more than 3 weeks. The improving effects are not only found on a neuropsychological test level but also on daily activities of the patient.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Denise de Jong, MSc, and Dario Cazzoli, PhD, for helping to prepare the manuscript.

References

  1. Appelros P, Karlsson GM, Seiger A et al (2003) Prognosis for patients with neglect and anosognosia with special reference to cognitive impairment. J Rehabil Med 35:254–258CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Azouvi P, Bartolomeo P, Beis JM et al (2006) A battery of tests for the quantitative assessment of unilateral neglect. Restor Neurol Neurosci 24:273–285PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonni S, Mastropasqua C, Bozzali M et al (2013) Theta burst stimulation improves visuo-spatial attention in a patient with traumatic brain injury. Neurol Sci 34:2053–2056CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowen A, Lincoln NB, Dewey ME (2002) Spatial neglect: is rehabilitation effective? Stroke 33:2728–2729CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brighina F, Bisiach E, Oliveri M et al (2003) 1 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere ameliorates contralesional visuospatial neglect in humans. Neurosci Lett 336:131–133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Buxbaum LJP, Ferraro MKP, Veramonti TB et al (2004) Hemispatial neglect: subtypes, neuroanatomy, and disability. Neurology 62:749–756CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cazzoli D, Müri RM, Hess CW, Nyffeler T (2010) Treatment of hemispatial neglect by means of rTMS - a review. Restor Neurol Neurosci 28:499–510Google Scholar
  8. Cazzoli D, Müri RM, Schumacher R et al (2012) Theta burst stimulation reduces disability during the activities of daily living in spatial neglect. Brain 135:3426–3439CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cherney LR, Halper AS, Kwasnica CM et al (2001) Recovery of functional status after right hemisphere stroke: relationship with unilateral neglect. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82:322–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Corbetta M, Shulman GL (2011) Spatial neglect and attention networks. Annu Rev Neurosci 34:569–599PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Corbetta M, Kincade MJ, Lewis C et al (2005) Neural basis and recovery of spatial attention deficits in spatial neglect. Nat Neurosci 8:1603–1610CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Di Monaco M, Schintu S, Dotta M et al (2011) Severity of unilateral spatial neglect is an independent predictor of functional outcome after acute inpatient rehabilitation in individuals with right hemispheric stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 92:1250–1256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Field AP (2009) Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Fierro B, Brighina F, Bisiach E (2006) Improving neglect by TMS. Behav Neurol 17:169–176CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gillen R, Tennen H, McKee T (2005) Unilateral spatial neglect: relation to rehabilitation outcomes in patients with right hemisphere stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86:763–767CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Goldsworthy MR, Pitcher JB, Ridding MC (2012) A comparison of two different continuous theta burst stimulation paradigms applied to the human primary motor cortex. Clin Neurophysiol 123:2256–2263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al (2008) Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ 336:1049–1051Google Scholar
  18. He BJ, Snyder AZ, Vincent JL et al (2007) Breakdown of functional connectivity in frontoparietal networks underlies behavioral deficits in spatial neglect. Neuron 53:905–918CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Heilman KM, Watson RT, Valenstein E (2003) Neglect and related disorders. In: Heilman KM, Valenstein E (eds) Clinical neuropsychology, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, London, pp 296–346Google Scholar
  20. Hesse MR, Sparing R, Fink GR (2011) Ameliorating spatial neglect with non-invasive brain stimulation: from pathophysiological concepts to novel treatment strategies. Neuropsychol Rehabil 21:676–702CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Huang YZ, Rothwell JC, Chen RS et al (2011) The theoretical model of theta burst form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 122:1011–1018PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Katz N, Hartman-Maeir A, Ring H et al (1999) Functional disability and rehabilitation outcome in right hemisphere damaged patients with and without unilateral spatial neglect. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 80:379–384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kerkhoff G, Schenk T (2012) Rehabilitation of neglect: an update. Neuropsychologia 50:1072–1079CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim JS, Kim JC, Shin SH et al (2010) Comparison of effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with high- or low-frequency on visuospatial neglect in stroke patients. J Korean Acad Rehabil Med 34:397–402Google Scholar
  25. Kim BR, Chun MH, Kim DY et al (2013) Effect of high- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on visuospatial neglect in patients with acute stroke: a double- blind, sham-controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 94:803–807CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kinsbourne M (1987) Mechanisms of unilateral neglect. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 69–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kinsbourne M (1993) Orientational bias model of unilateral neglect: evidence from attentional gradients within hemispace. In: Robertson IH, Marshall JC (eds) Unilateral neglect: clinical and experimental studies. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove, pp 63–86Google Scholar
  28. Koch G, Cercignani M, Bonni S et al (2011) Asymmetry of parietal interhemispheric connections in humans. J Neurosci 31:8967–8975CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Koch G, Bonni S, Giacobbe V et al (2012) Theta-burst stimulation of the left hemisphere accelerates recovery of hemispatial neglect. Neurology 78:24–30CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lim JY, Kang EK, Paik N-J (2010) Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to hemispatial neglect in patients after stroke: an open-label pilot study. J Rehabil Med 425:447–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mahoney F, Barthel D (1965) Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J 14:56–61Google Scholar
  32. Morris SB, DeShon RP (2002) Combining effect sizes estimates in meta-analysis with repeated measures and independent-groups designs. Psychol Methods 7:105–125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Müri RM, Cazzoli D, Nef T et al (2013) Non-invasive brain stimulation in neglect rehabilitation: an update. Front Hum Neurosci 7:248. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00248, eCollection 2013PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Nyffeler T, Wurtz P, Luscher HR et al (2006) Repetitive TMS over the human oculomotor cortex: comparison of 1-Hz and theta burst stimulation. Neurosci Lett 409:57–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Nyffeler T, Cazzoli D, Hess CW et al (2009) One session of repeated parietal theta burst stimulation trains induces long-lasting improvement of visual neglect. Stroke 40:2791–2796CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Paolucci S, Antonucci G, Grasso MG et al (2001) The role of unilateral spatial neglect in rehabilitation of right brain-damaged ischemic stroke patients: a matched comparison. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82:743–749CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Payne BR, Rushmore RJ (2004) Functional circuitry underlying natural and interventional cancellation of visual neglect. Exp Brain Res 154:127–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Pedersen PM, Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H et al (1997) Hemineglect in acute stroke – incidence and prognostic implications. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 76:122–127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Plummer P, Morris ME, Dunai J (2003) Assessment of unilateral neglect. Phys Ther 83:732–740PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Ringman JM, Saver JL, Woolson RF et al (2004) Frequency, risk factors, anatomy, and course of unilateral neglect in an acute stroke cohort. Neurology 63:468–474CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rushmore RJ, Valero-Cabre A, Lomber SG et al (2006) Functional circuitry underlying visual neglect. Brain 129:1803–1821CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Schulz R, Gerloff C, Hummel FC (2013) Non-invasive brain stimulation in neurological diseases. Neuropharmacology 64:579–587CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Shindo K, Sugiyama K, Huabao L et al (2006) Long-term effect of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the unaffected posterior parietal cortex in patients with unilateral spatial neglect. J Rehabil Med 38:65–67CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Song W, Du B, Xu Q et al (2009) Low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation for visual spatial neglect: a pilot study. J Rehabil Med 413:162–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sprague JM (1966) Interaction of cortex and superior colliculus in mediation of visually guided behavior in the cat. Science 153:1544–1547CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Stone SP, Patel P, Greenwood RJ et al (1992) Measuring visual neglect in acute stroke and predicting its recovery: the visual neglect recovery index. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 55:431–436PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Valero-Cabré A, Rushmore RJ, Payne BR (2006) Low frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation on the posterior parietal cortex induces visuotopically specific neglect-like syndrome. Exp Brain Res 172:14–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Verdon V, Schwartz S, Lovblad KO et al (2010) Neuroanatomy of hemispatial neglect and its functional components: a study using voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping. Brain 133:880–894CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Wee JY, Hopman WM (2005) Stroke impairment predictors of discharge function, length of stay, and discharge destination in stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 84:604–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wee JY, Hopman WM (2008) Comparing consequences of right and left unilateral neglect in a stroke rehabilitation population. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 87:910–920CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Yang NYH, Zhou D, Chung RCK et al (2013) Rehabilitation interventions for unilateral neglect after stroke: a systematic review from 1997 through 2012. Front Hum Neurosci 7:187. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00187, eCollection 2013PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurologyUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations