ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2016
Brain Stimulation Therapy for Central Post-Stroke Pain from a Perspective of Interhemispheric Neural Network Remodeling.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home-based transcranial direct current stimulation plus tracking training therapy in people with stroke: an open-label feasibility study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2018Trial
- Topological properties of brain networks in patients with hemiplegic shoulder pain: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- Article
- Advancements in Modern Treatment Approaches for Central Post-Stroke Pain: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Contributions of neuroimaging in central poststroke pain: a review.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2024Review
- Stroke-Induced Central Pain: Overview of the Mechanisms, Management, and Emerging Targets of Central Post-Stroke Pain.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The mechanism and effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke pain.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2022Review
- Bilateral Motor Cortex tDCS Effects on Post-Stroke Pain and Spasticity: A Three Cases Study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Efficacy of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Acute Central Post-stroke Pain: A Case Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Diagnosis, Treatment, and Management of Dejerine-Roussy Syndrome: a Comprehensive Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2020Review
- Microglial depletion under thalamic hemorrhage ameliorates mechanical allodynia and suppresses aberrant axonal sprouting.JCI insight · 2020Article
- Feasibility of single and combined with other treatments using transcranial direct current stimulation for chronic stroke: A pilot study.SAGE open medicine · 2020Article
- Disrupted interhemispheric functional coordination in patients with chronic low back-related leg pain: a multiscale frequency-related homotopic connectivity study.Journal of pain research · 2019Article
- Diffusion Tensor Tractography Studies of Central Post-stroke Pain Due to the Spinothalamic Tract Injury: A Mini-Review.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Review
- Interactive Bio-feedback Therapy Using Hybrid Assistive Limbs for Motor Recovery after Stroke: Current Practice and Future Perspectives.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2016Review
- Neuromodulation approaches and applications in the management of post-stroke pain: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a debilitating, severe disorder affecting patient quality of life. Since CPSP is refractory to medication, various treatment modalities have been tried with marginal results. Following the first report of epidural motor cortex (M1) stimulation (MCS) for CPSP, many researchers have investigated the mechanisms of electrical stimulation of the M1. CPSP is currently considered to be a maladapted network reorganization problem following stroke, and recent studies have revealed that the activities of the impaired hemisphere after stroke may be inhibited by the contralesional hemisphere. Even though this interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) theory was originally proposed to explain the motor recovery process in stroke patients, we considered that IHI may also contribute to the CPSP mechanism. Based on the IHI theory and the fact that electrical stimulation of the M1 suppresses CPSP, we hypothesized that the inhibitory signals from the contralesional hemisphere may suppress the activities of the M1 in the ipsilesional hemisphere, and therefore pain suppression mechanisms may be malfunctioning in CPSP patients. In this context, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was considered to be a reasonable procedure to address the interhemispheric imbalance, as the bilateral M1 can be simultaneously stimulated using an anode (excitatory) and cathode (inhibitory). In this article, we review the potential mechanisms and propose a new model of CPSP. We also report two cases where CPSP was addressed with tDCS, discuss the potential roles of tDCS in the treatment of CPSP, and make recommendations for future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.