Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Volume

36

Issue

4-5

First Page

306

Last Page

316

PubMed ID

35337223

Publisher

Sage

School

School of Medical and Health Sciences

Funders

Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) [MOP#125954] W.-D. Heiss Foundation Lady Davis Institute at the Jewish General Hospital [CLIPP#2014] CIHR postdoctoral fellowship

Comments

Zumbansen, A., Kneifel, H., Lazzouni, L., Ophey, A., Black, S. E., Chen, J. L., ... & NORTHSTAR-study group. (2022). Differential Effects of Speech and Language Therapy and rTMS in Chronic Versus Subacute Post-stroke Aphasia: Results of the NORTHSTAR-CA Trial. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 36(4-5), p. 306-316, 15459683211065448. https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683211065448

Abstract

Background & objective: Contralesional 1-Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the right pars triangularis combined with speech-language therapy (SLT) has shown positive results on the recovery of naming in subacute (5–45 days) post-stroke aphasia. NORTHSTAR-CA is an extension of the previously reported NORTHSTAR trial to chronic aphasia (>6 months post-stroke) designed to compare the effectiveness of the same rTMS protocol in both phases. Methods: Sixty-seven patients with left middle cerebral artery infarcts (28 chronic, 39 subacute) were recruited (01-2014 to 07-2019) and randomized to receive rTMS (N = 34) or sham stimulation (N = 33) with SLT for 10 days. Primary outcome variables were Z-score changes in naming, semantic fluency and comprehension tests and adverse event frequency. Intention-to-treat analyses tested between-group effects at days 1 and 30 post-treatment. Chronic and subacute results were compared. Results: Adverse events were rare, mild, and did not differ between groups. Language outcomes improved significantly in all groups irrespective of treatment and recovery phase. At 30-day follow-up, there was a significant interaction of stimulation and recovery phase on naming recovery (P <.001). Naming recovery with rTMS was larger in subacute (Mdn = 1.91/IQR =.77) than chronic patients (Mdn =.15/IQR = 1.68/P =.015). There was no significant rTMS effect in the chronic aphasia group. Conclusions: The addition of rTMS to SLT led to significant supplemental gains in naming recovery in the subacute phase only. While this needs confirmation in larger studies, our results clarify neuromodulatory vs training-induced effects and indicate a possible window of opportunity for contralesional inhibitory stimulation interventions in post-stroke aphasia. NORTHSTAR trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02020421.

DOI

10.1177/15459683211065448

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License

Share

 
COinS