Linguistic effects of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in patients with primary progressive aphasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

IF 7.5 1区医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Pub Date : 2025-06-18 DOI:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106264

Diogo C. Godoi , Eduarda Pandiá , Maria Eduarda Rodrigues , Luísa Araújo , Marina Barbosa , Khaled Alhwaishel , Amanda Godoi , David J. McGonigle

{"title":"Linguistic effects of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in patients with primary progressive aphasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials","authors":"Diogo C. Godoi , Eduarda Pandiá , Maria Eduarda Rodrigues , Luísa Araújo , Marina Barbosa , Khaled Alhwaishel , Amanda Godoi , David J. McGonigle","doi":"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has shown promising language improvements in patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Yet, individual studies have not been sufficient to yield strong conclusions on its efficacy.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tDCS against sham stimulation in patients with PPA. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases for eligible studies up to July 2024. Outcomes of interest included a performance in a range of language and cognitive tests. Summary data was extracted from published reports and pooled with a random-effects model using standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42024499012.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 10 parallel and cross-over RCTs with 178 patients and 218 observations. tDCS yielded significant improvements for general naming (SMD 0.37; 95 % CI 0.07–0.67; p < 0.01) and spelling ability (SMD 0.65; 95 % CI 0.10–1.20; p = 0.02) There were no differences between groups regarding naming performance for trained (p = 0.76) and untrained items (p = 0.11), global language (p = 0.28), working memory (p = 0.15), semantic fluency (p = 0.38), and comprehension (p = 0.32).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In this systematic review and meta-analysis, tDCA showed benefits for performance in general naming ability and spelling in PPA patients. However, there was no significant evidence to supporting any effect of tDCS on other language functions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56105,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","volume":"176 ","pages":"Article 106264"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763425002659","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has shown promising language improvements in patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Yet, individual studies have not been sufficient to yield strong conclusions on its efficacy.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tDCS against sham stimulation in patients with PPA. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases for eligible studies up to July 2024. Outcomes of interest included a performance in a range of language and cognitive tests. Summary data was extracted from published reports and pooled with a random-effects model using standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42024499012.

Results

We included 10 parallel and cross-over RCTs with 178 patients and 218 observations. tDCS yielded significant improvements for general naming (SMD 0.37; 95 % CI 0.07–0.67; p < 0.01) and spelling ability (SMD 0.65; 95 % CI 0.10–1.20; p = 0.02) There were no differences between groups regarding naming performance for trained (p = 0.76) and untrained items (p = 0.11), global language (p = 0.28), working memory (p = 0.15), semantic fluency (p = 0.38), and comprehension (p = 0.32).

Conclusion

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, tDCA showed benefits for performance in general naming ability and spelling in PPA patients. However, there was no significant evidence to supporting any effect of tDCS on other language functions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

经颅直流电刺激（tDCS）对原发性进行性失语症患者的语言影响：随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

经颅直流电刺激（tDCS）在原发性进行性失语症（PPA）患者中显示出有希望的语言改善。然而，个别研究还不足以对其有效性得出强有力的结论。方法：我们对比较PPA患者tDCS与假刺激的随机对照试验（rct）进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。我们检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane Central数据库，检索了截止到2024年7月的符合条件的研究。研究结果包括在一系列语言和认知测试中的表现。从已发表的报告中提取汇总数据，并使用标准化平均差异（SMD）和95%置信区间（CI）与随机效应模型合并。该协议注册在PROSPERO， CRD42024499012。结果：我们纳入了10项平行和交叉随机对照试验，共178例患者和218例观察结果。tDCS对通用命名产生了显著的改进(SMD 0.37；95% CI 0.07 ~ 0.67；结论：在本系统综述和荟萃分析中，tDCA对PPA患者的一般命名能力和拼写表现有好处。然而，没有明显的证据支持tDCS对其他语言功能的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 医学-行为科学

CiteScore

14.20

自引率

3.70%

发文量

466

审稿时长

6 months

期刊介绍： The official journal of the International Behavioral Neuroscience Society publishes original and significant review articles that explore the intersection between neuroscience and the study of psychological processes and behavior. The journal also welcomes articles that primarily focus on psychological processes and behavior, as long as they have relevance to one or more areas of neuroscience.