Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neuromodulation in Post-stroke Aphasia Treatment

  • Rehabilitation Technology (R Harvey, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This paper aims to review non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) methods to augment speech and language therapy (SLT) for patients with post-stroke aphasia.

Recent Findings

In the past 5 years, there have been more than 30 published studies assessing the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for improving aphasia in people who have had a stroke. Different approaches to NIBS treatment have been used in post-stroke aphasia treatment including different stimulation locations, stimulation intensity, number of treatment sessions, outcome measures, type of aphasia treatment, and time post-stroke.

Summary

This review of NIBS for post-stroke aphasia shows that both tDCS and TMS can be beneficial for improving speech and language outcomes for patients with stroke. Prior to translating NIBS to clinical practice, further studies are needed to determine optimal tDCS and TMS parameters as well as the mechanisms underlying tDCS and TMS treatment outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. National Aphasia Association. National Aphasia Association. 2019.

  2. Fama ME, Turkeltaub PE. Treatment of poststroke aphasia: current practice and new directions. Sem in Neuro. 2014;34(5):504–13. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1396004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. •• Brady MC, Godwin J, Enderby P, Kelly H, Campbell P. Speech and language therapy for aphasia after stroke: an updated systematic review and meta-analyses. Stroke. 2016;47(10):e236–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.116.014439. This comprehensive review synthesized evidence of the effectiveness of SLT for aphasia after stroke based on randomized control trials compared with (1) no therapy and (2) other SLT interventions.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Daniela M, Calin C, Bogdan I, Radu M. Transcranial magnetic stimulation in stroke rehabilitation. Balneo Res J. 2018;9:264–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Haghighi M, Mazdeh M, Ranjbar N, Seifrabie MA. Further evidence of the positive influence of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on speech and language in patients with aphasia after stroke: results from a double-blind intervention with sham condition. Neuropsychobiology. 2018;75:185–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hartwigsen G. The neurophysiology of language: insights from non-invasive brain stimulation in the healthy human brain. Brain Lang. Elsevier Inc. 2015;148:81–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.10.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. León Ruiz M, Rodríguez Sarasa ML, Sanjuán Rodríguez L, Benito-León J, García-Albea Ristol E, Arce Arce S. Current evidence on transcranial magnetic stimulation and its potential usefulness in post-stroke neurorehabilitation: opening new doors to the treatment of cerebrovascular disease. Neurol Sociedad Española de Neurología. 2018;33:459–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrleng.2016.03.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. • Georgiou AM, Lada E, Kambanaros M. Evaluating the quality of conduct of systematic reviews on the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for aphasia rehabilitation post-stroke. Aphasiology. 2019;00:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1632786. This evaluation of systematic reviews highlights the need for more methodologically rigorous trials of TMS to evaluate its effectiveness in the treatment of aphasia.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Crosson B, McGregor KM, Nocera JR, Drucker JH, Tran SM, Butler AJ. The relevance of aging-related changes in brain function to rehabilitation in aging-related disease. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yoon TH, Han SJ, Yoon TS, Kim JS, Yi TI. Therapeutic effect of repetitive magnetic stimulation combined with speech and language therapy in post-stroke non-fluent aphasia. NeuroRehabilitation. 2015;36:107–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans. Neurology. 2001;57(10):1899–901. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.57.10.1899.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lang N, Nitsche MA, Paulus W, Rothwell JC, Lemon RN. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation over the human motor cortex on corticospinal and transcallosal excitability. Exp Brain Research. 2004;156(4):439–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Floel A, Cohen LG. Recovery of function in humans: cortical stimulation and pharmacological treatments after stroke. Neurobio Disease. 2010;37(2):243–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2009.05.027.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nitsche MA, Jaussi W, Liebetanz D, Lang N, Tergau F, Paulus W. Consolidation of human motor cortical neuroplasticity by D-cycloserine. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2004;29(8):1573–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Reis J, Schambra HM, Cohen LG, Buch ER, Fritsch B, Zarahn E, et al. Noninvasive cortical stimulation enhances motor skill acquisition over multiple days through an effect on consolidation. PNAS. 2009;106(5):1590–5. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805413106.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. • Santos MD dos, Cavenaghi VB, APMG M-K, Serafim V, Venturi A, Truong DQ, et al. Non-invasive brain stimulation and computational models in post-stroke aphasic patients: Single session of transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation. A randomized clinical trial. Sao Paulo Med J. 2017;135:475–80. This study directly compares multiple non-invasive brain stimulation methods, finding no significant differences between tDCS, TMS, and sham stimulation on naming improvement.

  17. Szaflarski JP, Griffis J, Vannest J, Allendorfer JB, Nenert R, Amara AW, et al. A feasibility study of combined intermittent theta burst stimulation and modified constraint-induced aphasia therapy in chronic post-stroke aphasia. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2018;36:503–18.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Turkeltaub PE. Brain stimulation and the role of the right hemisphere in aphasia recovery. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2015;15.

  19. Schlaug G, Renga V, Nair D. Transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke recovery. Arch Neuro. 2008;65(12):1571–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.65.12.1571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Heiss WD, Thiel A. A proposed regional hierarchy in recovery of post-stroke aphasia. Brain Lang. 2006;98:118–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gainotti G. Contrasting opinions on the role of the right hemisphere in the recovery of language. A critical survey. Aphasiology. 2015;29:1020–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2015.1027170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hartwigsen G, Saur D. Neuroimaging of stroke recovery from aphasia – insights into plasticity of the human language network. Neuroimage. 2019;190:14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.11.056.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. • Harvey DY, Mass JA, Shah-Basak PP, Wurzman R, Faseyitan O, Sacchetti DL, et al. Continuous theta burst stimulation over right pars triangularis facilitates naming abilities in chronic post-stroke aphasia by enhancing phonological access. Brain Lang. 2019;192:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2019.02.005. This study demonstrates one approach to investigating which patients are most likely to benefit from rTMS/cTBS, finding that baseline phonological but not semantic naming impairment severity correlated with increased accuracy and decreased phonological errors after cTBS of the right IFG.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Li Y, Qu Y, Yuan M, Du T. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for patients with aphasia after stroke: a meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2015;47:675–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Naeser MA, Martin PI, Nicholas M, Baker EH, Seekins H, Kobayashi M, et al. Improved picture naming in chronic aphasia after TMS to part of right Broca’s area: an open-protocol study. Brain Lang. 2005;93:95–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Otal B, Olma MC, Flöel A, Wellwood I. Inhibitory non-invasive brain stimulation to homologous language regions as an adjunct to speech and language therapy in post-stroke aphasia: a meta-analysis. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9.

  27. Shah PP, Szaflarski JP, Allendorfer J, Hamilton RH. Induction of neuroplasticity and recovery in post-stroke aphasia by non-invasive brain stimulation. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013;7:888.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rubi-Fessen I, Hartmann A, Huber W, Fimm B, Rommel T, Thiel A, et al. Add-on effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on subacute aphasia therapy: enhanced improvement of functional communication and basic linguistic skills. A randomized controlled study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:1935–1944.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2015.06.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. •• Ren C, Zhang G, Xu X, Hao J, Fang H, Chen P, et al. The effect of rTMS over the different targets on language recovery in stroke patients with global aphasia: a randomized sham-controlled study. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:1–7. This relatively large (N= 45) randomized, sham-controlled study of subacute post-stroke aphasia showed that inhibitory low-frequency rTMS of right IFG and right STG both lead to language improvements, demonstrating that targets beyond right IFG can be effective.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. • Hara T, Abo M, Kobayashi K, Watanabe M, Kakuda W, Senoo A. Effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with intensive speech therapy on cerebral blood flow in post-stroke aphasia. Transl Stroke Res. 2015;6:365–74. This study showed that pre-treatment language lateralization can be used to guide rTMS protocol design. Positive results were observed both for inhibitory low-frequency rTMS of the right IFG in patients who had left lateralized language, supporting recovery, and for excitatory high-frequency rTMS of the right IFG in patients who had right lateralized language, supporting compensation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Harvey DY, Podell J, Turkeltaub PE, Faseyitan O, Coslett HB, Hamilton RH. Functional reorganization of right prefrontal cortex underlies sustained naming improvements in chronic aphasia via repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Cogn Behav Neurol. 2017;30:133–44.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rossetti A, Malfitano C, Malloggi C, Banco E, Rota V, Tesio L. Phonemic fluency improved after inhibitory transcranial magnetic stimulation in a case of chronic aphasia. Int J Rehabil Res. 2019;42:92–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. • Heikkinen PH, Pulvermüller F, Mäkelä JP, Ilmoniemi RJ, Lioumis P, Kujala T, et al. Combining rTMS with intensive language-action therapy in chronic aphasia: a randomized controlled trial. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:1–13 This study is one of the few recently published null results for rTMS, finding that chronic post-stroke aphasia participants improved as a result of a specific speech therapy protocol but not as a result of inhibitory low-frequency rTMS of the right IFG.

    Google Scholar 

  34. • Zhang H, Chen Y, Hu R, Yang L, Wang M, Zhang J, et al. RTMS treatments combined with speech training for a conduction aphasia patient. Med (United States). 2017;96. This case study showed improvement after excitatory high-frequency rTMS of the left IFG, demonstrating that the strategy more commonly undertaken in tDCS of stimulating perilesional left hemisphere regions can be effective in rTMS as well.

  35. Postman-Caucheteux WA, Birn RM, Pursley RH, Butman JA, Solomon JM, Picchioni D, et al. Single-trial fMRI shows contralesional activity linked to overt naming errors in chronic aphasic patients. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010;22:1299–318.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. • Saur D, Lange R, Baumgaertner A, Schraknepper V, Willmes K, Rijntjes M, et al. Dynamics of language reorganization after stroke. Brain. 2006;129:1371–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stockert A, Kümmerer D, Saur D. Insights into early language recovery: from basic principles to practical applications. Aphasiology. 2016;30:517–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2015.1119796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Anglade C, Thiel A, Ansaldo AI. The complementary role of the cerebral hemispheres in recovery from aphasia after stroke: a critical review of literature. Brain Inj. 2014;28:138–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Thiel A, Zumbansen A. The pathophysiology of post-stroke aphasia: a network approach. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2016;34:507–18.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hara T, Abo M, Kakita K, Mori Y, Yoshida M, Sasaki N. The effect of selective transcranial magnetic stimulation with functional near-infrared spectroscopy and intensive speech therapy on individuals with post-stroke aphasia. Eur Neurol. 2017;77:186–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. • Hu X yan, Zhang T, Rajah GB, Stone C, Xu LL, Jie HJ, et al. Effects of different frequencies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in stroke patients with non-fluent aphasia: a randomized, sham-controlled study. Neurol Res. 2018;40:459–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616412.2018.1453980. This relatively large (N= 40) randomized, sham-controlled study of chronic post-stroke aphasia showed that both high- and low-frequency rTMS of the right IFG can be effective.

  42. Huang YZ, Edwards MJ, Rounis E, Bhatia KP, Rothwell JC. Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex. Neuron. 2005;45:201–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Georgiou A, Konstantinou N, Phinikettos I, Kambanaros M. Neuronavigated theta burst stimulation for chronic aphasia: two exploratory case studies. Clin Linguist Phonetics Taylor & Francis. 2019;33:532–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Griffis JC, Nenert R, Allendorfer JB, Szaflarski JP. Interhemispheric plasticity following intermittent theta burst stimulation in chronic poststroke aphasia. Neural Plast. 2016;2016:1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Vuksanović J, Jelić MB, Milanović SD, Kačar K, Konstantinović L, Filipović SR. Improvement of language functions in a chronic non-fluent post-stroke aphasic patient following bilateral sequential theta burst magnetic stimulation. Neurocase. 2015;21:244–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13554794.2014.890731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Chrysikou EG, Hamilton RH. Noninvasive brain stimulation in the treatment of aphasia: exploring interhemispheric relationships and their implications for neurorehabilitation. Restorative Neuro and Neurosci. 2011;29(6):375–94. https://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-2011-0610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Branscheidt M, Hoppe J, Zwitserlood P, Liuzzi G. TDCS over the motor cortex improves lexical retrieval of action words in post stroke aphasia. J Neurophysiol. 2018;119(2):621–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Darkow R, Martin A, Würtz A, Flöel A, Meinzer M. Transcranial direct current stimulation effects on neural processing in post-stroke aphasia. Hum Brain Mapp. 2017;38(3):1518–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Pestalozzi MI, Di Pietro M, Martins Gaytanidis C, Spierer L, Schnider A, Chouiter L, et al. Effects of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation on lexical access in chronic poststroke aphasia. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2018;32(10):913–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Campana S, Caltagirone C, Marangolo P. Combining voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping (VLSM) with a-tdcs language treatment: predicting outcome of recovery in nonfluent chronic aphasia. Brain Stimul. 2015;8(4):769–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2015.01.413.

  51. •• Fridriksson J, Rorden C, Elm J, Sen S, George MS, Bonilha L. Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham stimulation to treat aphasia after stroke: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(12):1470–6. This is the largest post-stroke aphasia tDCS trial using a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled design in 74 chronic patients. Participants received tDCS to the left temporal lobe region based on naming activation on the fMRI. tDCS was associated with greater change in number of correctly naming pictured objects compared to sham.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. da Silva FR, Mac-Kay APMG, Chao JCT, dos Santos MD, Gagliadi RJ. Transcranial direct current stimulation: a study on naming performance in aphasic individuals. Codas. 2018;30(5):1–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. • Spielmann K, Van De Sandt-Koenderman MWE, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Ribbers GM. Transcranial direct current stimulation does not improve language outcome in subacute poststroke aphasia. Stroke. 2018;49(4):1018–20. This study is one of the few recently published null results for tDCS in subacute post-stroke aphasia. Results showed that both the tDCS and sham groups improved with SLT, but there was no significant difference between tDCS and sham.

  54. Meinzer M, Darkow R, Lindenberg R, Flöel A. Electrical stimulation of the motor cortex enhances treatment outcome in post-stroke aphasia. Brain. 2016;139(4):1152–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Wu D, Wang J, Yuan Y. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on naming and cortical excitability in stroke patients with aphasia. Neurosci Lett. 2015;589:115–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2015.01.045.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Feil S, Eisenhut P, Strakeljahn F, Müller S, Nauer C, Bansi J, et al. Left shifting of language related activity induced by bihemispheric tDCS in post acute aphasia following stroke. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Marangolo P, Fiori V, Sabatini U, De Pasquale G, Razzano C, Caltagirone C, et al. Bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation language treatment enhances functional connectivity in the left hemisphere: preliminary data from aphasia. J Cogn Neurosci. 2016;28(5):724–38. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00409.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Manenti R, Petesi M, Brambilla M, Rosini S, Miozzo A, Padovani A, et al. Efficacy of semantic–phonological treatment combined with tDCS for verb retrieval in a patient with aphasia. Neurocase. 2015;21(1):109–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13554794.2013.873062.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Bodranghien F, Bastian A, Casali C, Hallett M, Louis ED, Manto M, et al. Consensus paper: revisiting the symptoms and signs of cerebellar syndrome. Cerebellum. 2016;15(3):369–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Turkeltaub PE, Swears MK, D’Mello AM, Stoodley CJ. Cerebellar tDCS as a novel treatment for aphasia? Evidence from behavioral and resting-state functional connectivity data in healthy adults. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2016;34(4):491–505.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. • Sebastian R, Saxena S, Tsapkini K, Faria AV, Long C, Wright A, et al. Cerebellar tDCS: a novel approach to augment language treatment post-stroke. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017:10. This case study showed for the first time that anodal cerebellar tDCS improve language skills when combined with SLT in chronic post-stroke aphasia.

  62. Marangolo P, Fiori V, Caltagirone C, Pisano F, Priori A. Transcranial cerebellar direct current stimulation enhances verb generation but not verb naming in poststroke aphasia. J Cogn Neurosci. 2018;32(2):188–99. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Norise C, Sacchetti D, Hamilton R. Transcranial direct current stimulation in post-stroke chronic aphasia: the impact of baseline severity and task specificity in a pilot sample. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. • Shah-Basak PP, Norise C, Garcia G, Torres J, Faseyitan O, Hamilton RH. Individualized treatment with transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with chronic non-fluent aphasia due to stroke. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00201. This study used an innovative approach to figure out optimal stimulation montage for individual with post-stroke aphasia. Preferred electrode montage was established for each participant by assessing transient improvement on a picture-naming task. tDCS administered using the preferred montage resulted in improved naming compared to sham.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Cramer SC. Stimulating dialogue through treatment of poststroke aphasia with transcranial direct current stimulation. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(12):1465–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Fridriksson J, Elm J, Stark BC, Basilakos A, Rorden C, Sen S, et al. BDNF genotype and tDCS interaction in aphasia treatment. Brain Stimul. 2018;11(6):1276–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2018.08.009.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Elsner B, Kugler J, Pohl M, Mehrholz J. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in patients after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;6(5):CD009760.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The research reported in this article was supported by the National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Deafness and Communication Disorders) through awards R00DC015554 and P50 DC014664.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N Wolfe Street, Phipps 546, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA

    Bonnie L. Breining

  2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N Wolfe Street, Phipps 183, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA

    Rajani Sebastian

Authors
  1. Bonnie L. Breining
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajani Sebastian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rajani Sebastian.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Bonnie Breining and Rajani Sebastian both received grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during the conduct of the study.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Rehabilitation Technology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Breining, B.L., Sebastian, R. Neuromodulation in Post-stroke Aphasia Treatment. Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep 8, 44–56 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-020-00257-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-020-00257-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation