不同频率重复经颅磁刺激对脑卒中患者认知和运动的影响

毛晶; 洪永锋; 冯小军; 唐晓晓; 张金牛; 阚秀丽; 沈显山; 吴建贤

doi:10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.002518

不同频率重复经颅磁刺激对脑卒中患者认知和运动的影响

doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.002518

安徽医科大学第二附属医院康复医学科，安徽合肥 230601

基金项目:

安徽省重点研究与开发计划项目 202004j07020040

安徽省转化医学研究院科研基金项目 2021zhyx-C50

详细信息

通讯作者:
毛晶, E-mail: maojing8544@aliyun.com

中图分类号: R743.3 R454.1
计量
- 文章访问数: 351
- HTML全文浏览量: 119
- PDF下载量: 10
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2022-02-11
- 网络出版日期: 2022-09-21

Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of different frequencies on the cognition and movement of stroke patients

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, the Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui 230601, China

摘要

摘要: 目的比较不同强度的重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)对脑卒中后认知障碍患者认知和运动的影响。方法纳入2018年10月—2020年3月于安徽医科大学第二附属医院康复医学科住院的脑卒中患者63例，采用随机数表法分为3组(对照组22例、低频组20例、高频组21例)。对照组采用常规康复训练，低频组增加1 Hz的rTMS治疗，高频组增加10 Hz的rTMS治疗。治疗时间为3周。治疗前后比较患者蒙特利尔认知评估量表(MoCA)、简易智力状态检查量表(MMSE)、Fugl-Meyer量表(FMA)、改良Barthel指数(MBI)等。结果 3组患者治疗后MoCA、MMSE、FMA、MBI评分较治疗前明显增加(均P < 0.05)；治疗后高频组、低频组各项总分均优于对照组(均P＜0.05)，治疗前后高频组与低频组的MoCA差值[(6.71±1.76)分vs. (4.85±2.03)分]，MMSE差值[(3.05±1.07)分vs. (2.10±1.02)分]，FMA差值[(7.52±2.36)分vs. (5.30±3.25)分]，MBI差值[(10.00±4.74)分vs. (6.25±3.58)分]比较差异均有统计学意义(均P＜0.05)。治疗后，高频组与低频组MoCA量表中的视空间与执行功能、定向能力评分比较差异有统计学意义(均P＜0.05)。治疗后MoCA的差值与FMA的差值呈正相关关系(高频组r=0.906、低频组r=0.902、对照组r=0.886，均P < 0.01)。结论常规康复训练联合高频或低频rTMS治疗均能够改善患者认知水平、运动功能和生活自理能力，常规康复联合高频rTMS康复效果更优。
- 脑卒中 /
- 认知功能障碍 /
- 重复经颅磁刺激
Abstract: Objective To compare the effects of different intensities of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on cognition and movement in patients with cognitive impairment after stroke. Methods A total of 63 stroke patients who were hospitalised in the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine of the Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University from October 2018 to March 2020 were included. They were randomly divided into three groups (22 cases in control group, 20 cases in low-frequency group and 21 cases in high-frequency group). The control group was treated with routine rehabilitation training. One Hz rTMS treatment was added to the low frequency group. Ten Hz rTMS treatment was added to the high frequency group. The duration of the above treatment was three weeks. The patients were evaluated using the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Fuel-Meyer assessment(FMA) and modified barthel index (MBI) before and after treatment. Results The scores of MOCA, MMSE, FMA and MBI in the three groups were significantly higher than those before treatment (all P < 0.05). After treatment, the total scores of the high-frequency and low-frequency groups were better than those of the control group (all P < 0.05). Before and after treatment, there were significant differences in MOCA difference [(6.71±1.76) points vs. (4.85±2.03) points], MMSE difference [(3.05±1.07) points vs. (2.10±1.02) points], FMA difference [(7.52 ± 2.36) points vs. (5.30±3.25) points] and MBI difference [(10.00±4.74) points vs. (6.25±3.58) points] between high frequency group and low frequency group (all P < 0.05). The scores of visual space, executive function and orientation ability in the high-frequency and low-frequency groups before and after treatment were statistically significant (all P < 0.05). There was a significant positive correlation between the difference of MOCA and FMA after treatment (high-frequency group r=0.906, low-frequency group r=0.902, control group r=0.886, all P < 0.01). Conclusion Routine rehabilitation training combined with high-frequency or low-frequency rTMS can effectively improve patients ' cognition, movement and self-care ability, amongst which routine rehabilitation combined with high-frequency rTMS has the best effect. The cognitive and movement functions of stroke patients promote each other.
- Stroke /
- Cognitive dysfunction /
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

HTML全文

表 1 3组脑卒中患者基本资料比较

Table 1. Comparison of basic data of stroke patients in three groups

组别	例数	年龄 (x±s，岁)	病程 [M(P₂₅, P₇₅)，d]	性别(例)		卒中类型(例)		偏瘫侧(例)
组别	例数	年龄 (x±s，岁)	病程 [M(P₂₅, P₇₅)，d]	男性	女性	脑梗死	脑出血	左侧	右侧
高频组	21	58.48±9.10	63.00(28.00, 95.50)	16	5	14	7	11	10
低频组	20	60.00±8.53	51.00(20.25, 70.25)	14	6	15	5	10	10
对照组	22	52.95±14.62	51.00(31.25, 70.25)	18	4	16	6	11	11
统计量		2.189^a	0.888^b	0.807^c		0.377^c		0.032^c
P值		0.121	0.641	0.668		0.828		0.984
注：^a为F值，^b为H值，^c为χ²值。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 3组脑卒中患者MoCA总分比较(x±s，分)

Table 2. Comparison of MoCA total score of stroke patients in three groups (x±s, points)

组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前后差值
高频组	21	17.62±1.63	24.33±1.68^a	6.71±1.76^bc
低频组	20	17.35±1.46	22.20±1.99^a	4.85±2.03^b
对照组	22	17.45±1.90	20.23±1.38^a	2.77±1.90
F值		0.071	31.647	16.927
P值		0.932	＜0.001	＜0.001
注：与治疗前比较，^aP＜0.05；与对照组比较，^bP＜0.05；与低频组比较，^cP＜0.05。

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 高频组与低频组脑卒中患者MoCA子项目评分比较(x±s，分)

Table 3. Comparison of MoCA subitem scores of stroke patients in high-frequency group and low-frequency group (x±s, points)

组别	例数	视空间与执行功能	命名	注意力	语言	抽象思维	延迟回忆	定向
高频组	21	4.19±0.81	2.62±0.80	3.96±0.89	2.62±0.59	1.81±0.51	3.90±0.62	5.43±1.08
低频组	20	3.30±0.92	2.75±0.44	3.95±0.94	2.60±0.50	1.55±0.51	3.60±0.82	4.45±1.32
t值		3.280	-0.640	-0.657	0.111	1.625	1.333	2.612
P值		0.002	0.526	0.515	0.912	0.112	0.191	0.013

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 3组脑卒中患者MMSE评分比较(x±s，分)

Table 4. Comparison of MMSE scores among the three groups of stroke patients (x±s, points)

组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前后差值
高频组	21	11.29±1.31	14.33±1.43^a	3.05±1.07^bc
低频组	20	11.35±1.27	13.45±1.32^a	2.10±1.02^b
对照组	22	11.59±1.14	12.59±1.40^a	1.00±1.69
F值		0.528	9.196	27.140
P值		0.592	＜0.001	＜0.001
注：与治疗前比较，^aP＜0.05；与对照组比较，^bP＜0.05；与低频组比较，^cP＜0.05。

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 3组脑卒中患者FMA评分比较(x±s，分)

Table 5. Comparison of FMA scores among the three groups of stroke patients (x±s, points)

组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前后差值
高频组	21	49.71±2.26	57.24±1.73^a	7.52±2.36^bc
低频组	20	49.05±2.16	54.35±2.18^a	5.30±3.25^b
对照组	22	49.09±2.11	52.13±2.46^a	3.05±3.33
F值		2.267	35.401	16.682
P值		0.112	＜0.001	＜0.001
注：与治疗前比较，^aP＜0.05；与对照组比较，^bP＜0.05；与低频组比较，^cP＜0.05。

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 3组脑卒中患者MBI评分比较(x±s，分)

Table 6. Comparison of MBI scores among the three groups of stroke patients (x±ss, points)

组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前后差值
高频组	21	62.14±6.99	72.14±6.03^a	10.00±4.74^bc
低频组	20	63.75±5.10	70.00±4.59^a	6.25±3.58^b
对照组	22	62.50±5.29	66.82±5.47^a	4.32±2.34
F值		0.124	5.888	16.125
P值		0.884	0.005	＜0.001
注：与治疗前比较，^aP＜0.05；与对照组比较，^bP＜0.05；与低频组比较，^cP＜0.05。

下载: 导出CSV

表 7 3组脑卒中患者治疗前后MoCA差值与FMA差值间的Pearson相关分析(x±s)

Table 7. The difference between MOCA and FMA before and after treatment in three groups of stroke patients Pearson correlation analysis (x±s)

组别	例数	MoCA差值	FMA差值	r值	P值
高频组	21	6.71±1.76	7.52±2.36	0.906	＜0.001
低频组	20	4.85±2.03	5.30±3.25	0.902	＜0.001
对照组	22	2.77±1.90	3.05±3.33	0.886	＜0.001

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(22)

[1]	ZHOU M G, WANG H D, ZENG X Y, et al. Mortality, morbidity, and risk factors in China and its provinces, 1990-2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017[J]. Lancet, 2019, 394(10204): 1145-1158. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30427-1
[2]	Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990-2019: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019[J]. Lancet Neurol, 2021, 20(10): 795-820.
[3]	KEINS S, ABRAMSON J R, CASTELLO J P, et al. Latent profile analysis of cognitive decline and depressive symptoms after intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. BMC Neurol, 2021, 21(1): 481. doi: 10.1186/s12883-021-02508-x
[4]	JEONG S A, PARK C, OH S J, et al. Multiple relationships between cognition-motor impairment and activity-based clinical outcome measures in 218 hemiplegic stroke patients[J]. NeuroRehabilitation, 2021, 49(4): 553-563. doi: 10.3233/NRE-210195
[5]	中华医学会神经病学分会. 中国各类主要脑血管病诊断要点2019[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2019, 52(9): 710-715. Neurology Branch of Chinese Medical Association. Diagnostic criteria of cerebrovascular diseases in China (version 2019)[J]. Chinese Journal of Neurology, 2019, 52(9): 710-715.
[6]	LIU S S, WANG X L, MA J Q, et al. Effect of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on executive function and its neural mechanism: An event-related potential study[J]. Front Neurosci, 2021, 15: 701560. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.701560.eCollection2021.
[7]	KANG J M, CHO Y S, PARK S, et al. Montreal cognitive assessment reflects cognitive reserve[J]. BMC Geriatr, 2018, 18(1): 261. doi: 10.1186/s12877-018-0951-8
[8]	LI Y M, LUO H, YU Q, et al. Cerebral functional manipulation of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in cognitive impairment patients after stroke: An fMRI study[J]. Front Neurol, 2020, 11: 977. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00977.eCollection2020.
[9]	邹建鹏, 毕鸿雁, 彭伟. 非侵入性脑刺激技术在神经系统疾病康复中的应用[J]. 中华全科医学, 2017, 15(11): 1948-1951. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.2017.11.038 ZHOU J P, BI H Y, PENG W. Application of non-invasive brain stimulation technique in rehabilitation of neurological diseases[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2017, 15(11): 1948-1951. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.2017.11.038
[10]	CROARKIN P E, MACMASTER F P. Transcranial magnetic stimulation for adolescent depression[J]. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am, 2019, 28(1): 33-43. doi: 10.1016/j.chc.2018.07.003
[11]	梅盛瑞, 许晴, 袁鹏等. 经颅磁刺激在脑卒中后痉挛中的临床应用进展[J]. 中华全科医学, 2020, 18(12): 2078-2081, 2098. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001693 MEI S R, XU Q, YUAN P, et al. Clinical application progress of transcranial magnetic stimulation in spasticity after stroke[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2020, 18(12): 2078-2081, 2098. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001693
[12]	FERRO M, LAMANNA J, SPADINI S, et al. Synaptic plasticity mechanisms behind TMS efficacy: Insights from its application to animal models[J]. J Neural Transm (Vienna), 2022, 129(1): 25-36. doi: 10.1007/s00702-021-02436-7
[13]	GUO Z W, JIN Y, BAI X, et al. Distinction of High-and Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on the functional reorganization of the motor network in stroke patients[J]. Neural Plast, 2021, 2021: 8873221. DOI: 10.1155/2021/8873221.
[14]	张秀娟, 鲁银山, 张松等. 不同频率的高频重复经颅磁刺激对大鼠神经病理性疼痛的影响[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2021, 43(3): 200-205. ZHANG X J, LU Y S, ZHANG S, et al. The effects of frequency in treating neuropathic pain using transcranial magnetic stimulation[J]. Chinese Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2021, 43(3): 200-205.
[15]	张帆, 邹淑怡. 高频重复经颅磁刺激对脑卒中恢复期患者认知功能的影响[J]. 中国实用神经疾病杂志, 2019, 22(22): 2479-2485. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNSJ201922007.htm ZHANG F, ZOU S Y. Effects of high frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognitive function in stroke patients in convalescent stage[J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Nervous Diseases, 2019, 22(22): 2479-2485. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNSJ201922007.htm
[16]	DU J, YAO W H, LI J R, et al. Motor network reorganization after repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in early stroke patients: A resting state fMRI study[J]. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2022, 36(1): 61-68. doi: 10.1177/15459683211054184
[17]	赵德勋, 王静, 王进选. 体育运动锻炼对老年人健康素养水平及执行功能的影响[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2020, 40(4): 804-807. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLXZ202004044.htm ZHAO D X, WANG J, WANG J X. Effects of physical exercise on health literacy and executive function of the elderly[J]. Chinese Journal of Gerontology, 2020, 40(4): 804-807. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLXZ202004044.htm
[18]	郑美凤, 郎士娟, 赵碧仪, 等. 运动干预对认知功能改善机制的研究进展[J]. 中国康复, 2021, 36(3): 181-184. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLKF202103017.htm ZHENG M F, LANG S J, ZHAO B Y, et al. Research progress on the mechanism of exercise intervention on improving cognitive function[J]. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation, 2021, 36(3): 181-184. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLKF202103017.htm
[19]	RAICHLEN D A, BHARADWAJ P K, NGUYEN L A, et al. Effects of simultaneous cognitive and aerobic exercise training on dual-task walking performance in healthy older adults: Results from a pilot randomized controlled trial[J]. BMC Geriatr, 2020, 20(1): 83. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-1484-5
[20]	郑妍, 陈桂秋, 马思慧, 等. 有氧运动联合认知训练干预老年人轻度认知功能障碍的作用[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2020, 40(18): 4016-4019. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLXZ202018067.htm ZHENG Y, CHEN G Q, MA S H, et al. Effects of aerobic exercise combined with cognitive training on mild cognitive impairment in the elderly[J]. Chinese Journal of Gerontology, 2020, 40(18): 4016-4019. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLXZ202018067.htm
[21]	STULTZ D J, OSBURN S, BURNS T, et al. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) safety with respect to seizures: A literature review[J]. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, 2020, 16: 2989-3000. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S276635
[22]	武江, 宁国芳, 宋爱国, 等. rTMS治疗重型颅脑损伤诱发癫痫发作的相关因素分析[J]. 临床误诊误治, 2018, 31(12): 67-70. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCWZ201812020.htm WU J, NING G F, SONG A G, et al. Analysis of Related Factors of rTMS-induced Seizures in Patients with Severe Craniocerebral Injury[J]. Clinical Misdiagnosis & Mistherapy, 2018, 31(12): 67-70. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCWZ201812020.htm