Abstract:BackgroundBalance and gait impairments are major motor deficits in stroke patients that require intensive neuro-rehabilitation. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation is a neuro-modulatory technique recently used in stroke patients for balance and gait improvement. Majority of studies focusing on tDCS have assessed its effects on cerebral motor cortex and more recently cerebellum as well but to our best knowledge the comparison of stimulating these two regions in stroke patients is not investigated so far.ObjectiveThe current study aimed to compare the effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on cerebellar and cerebral motor cortex M1 in stroke patients.Materials and methodsThis double-blinded, parallel, randomized, sham controlled trial included 66 patients with a first-ever ischemic stroke were recruited into three groups; Cerebellar stimulation group (CbSG), M1 Stimulation Group (MSG), and Sham stimulation group (SSG). A total of three sessions of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation were given on consecutive days in addition to non-immersive virtual reality using Xbox 360 with kinect. Anodal tDCS with an intensity of 2 mA was applied for a duration of 20 min. Primary outcome measures berg balance scale (BBS), timed up and go test (TUG), BESTest Balance Evaluation–Systems Test (BESTest) and secondary outcomes measures montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), mini mental state examination (MMSE), Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JHFRAT), twenty five feet walk test (25FWT), six minute walk test (6MWT), and tDCS Adverse Effects was assessed before initiation of treatment (T0) and at the end of third session of stimulation (T1).ResultsThe results of between group’s analysis using mean difference showed a significant difference with p-value <0.05 for balance (BBS, TUG, BESTest), walking ability (6MWT, 25FWT), risk of fall (JHFRAT). Cognitive function did not show any significant change among the groups for MoCA with p-value >0.05 but MMSE was improved having significant p-value (p = 0.013). However, 6MWT and 25FWT showed non-significant results for both between group and within group analysis. In pairwise comparison both the cerebellar and cerebral stimulation groups showed Significant difference with p-value <0.05 in comparison to sham stimulation; BBS (cerebellar vs. sham p ≤ 0.001, cerebral vs. sham p = 0.011), TUG (cerebellar vs. sham p = 0.001, cerebral vs. sham p = 0.041), Bestest (cerebellar vs. sham p = 0.007, cerebral vs. sham p = 0.003). Whereas for JHFRAT only cerebellar stimulation in comparison to sham and motor cortex stimulation showed significant improvements (cerebellar vs. M1 p = 0.037, cerebellar vs. sham p = 0.037). MMSE showed significant improvement in M1 stimulation (M1 vs. cerebellar p = 0.036, M1 vs. sham p = 0.011).ConclusionFindings of the study suggest anodal tDCS stimulation of the cerebellum and cerebral motor cortex both improves gait, balance and risk of fall in stroke patients. However, both stimulation sites do not induce any notable improvement in cognitive function. Effects of both stimulation sites have similar effects on mobility in stroke patients.

Repeated sessions of noninvasive brain DC stimulation is associated with motor function improvement in stroke patients

The temporary and accumulated effects of transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of advanced Parkinson’s disease monkeys

Kinematic descriptors of arm reaching movement are sensitive to hemisphere-specific immediate neuromodulatory effects of transcranial direct current stimulation post stroke

How transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates post-stroke rehabilitation

Effects of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Rehabilitation of Upper Limb Motor Function after Stroke

Short Term Effects of Anodal Cerebellar Vs. Anodal Cerebral Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Stroke Patients, a Randomized Control Trial

Transcranial-Direct-Current-Stimulation Accelerates Motor Recovery After Cortical Infarction in Mice: The Interplay of Structural Cellular Responses and Functional Recovery

Effects of anodal tDCS on resting state eeg power and motor function in acute stroke: a randomized controlled trial

Long-Term Effects of Serial Anodal tDCS on Motion Perception in Subjects with Occipital Stroke Measured in the Unaffected Visual Hemifield

Increased both cortical activation and functional connectivity after transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with post-stroke: A functional near-infrared spectroscopy study

Abstract TP163: Electrode Montage and Dose of Non-Invasive Stimulation - Considerations for Stroke Recovery Studies

Unraveling Transformative Effects after tDCS and BCI Intervention in Chronic Post-Stroke Patient Rehabilitation-An Alternative Treatment Design Study

Transcranial direct current stimulation as a motor neurorehabilitation tool: an empirical review

Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery and motor cortex excitability in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial.

Combining transcranial direct current stimulation with hand robotic rehabilitation in chronic stroke patients: a double blind randomized clinical trial

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation with virtual reality on upper limb function in patients with ischemic stroke: a randomized controlled trial

Searching for the optimal tDCS target for motor rehabilitation

Concurrent tDCS-fMRI after stroke reveals link between attention network organization and motor improvement

Influence of Anodal tDCS on the Brain Functional Networks and Muscle Synergy of Hand Movements

Clinical Comparison between HD-tDCS and tDCS for Improving Upper Limb Motor Function: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Sham-Controlled Trial

Comparison of a Single Session of Tdcs on Cerebellum Vs. Motor Cortex in Stroke Patients: a Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial