Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38737898›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024

Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with motor deficits after brain tumor resection: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial.

Melina Engelhardt, Heike Schneider, Jan Reuther, Ulrike Grittner, Peter Vajkoczy, Thomas Picht, Tizian Rosenstock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Unilateral contralesional versus bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for patients with post stroke dysphagia: a randomized controlled study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Melina EngelhardtDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Heike SchneiderDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jan ReutherDepartment for Physical Medicine, Charité -Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ulrike GrittnerInstitute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Peter VajkoczyDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Thomas PichtDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Tizian RosenstockDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Surgical resection of motor eloquent tumors poses the risk of causing postoperative motor deficits which leads to reduced quality of life in these patients. Currently, rehabilitative procedures are limited with physical therapy being the main treatment option. This study investigated the efficacy of repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treatment of motor deficits after supratentorial tumor resection. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial (DRKS00010043) recruited patients with a postoperatively worsened upper extremity motor function immediately postoperatively. They were randomly assigned to receive rTMS (1Hz, 110% RMT, 15 minutes, 7 days) or sham stimulation to the motor cortex contralateral to the injury followed by physical therapy. Motor and neurological function as well as quality of life were assessed directly after the intervention, one month and three months postoperatively. Results: Thirty patients were recruited for this study. There was no significant difference between both groups in the primary outcome, the Fugl Meyer score three months postoperatively [Group difference (95%-CI): 5.05 (-16.0; 26.1); p=0.631]. Patients in the rTMS group presented with better hand motor function one month postoperatively. Additionally, a subgroup of patients with motor eloquent ischemia showed lower NIHSS scores at all timepoints. Conclusions: Low-frequency rTMS facilitated the recovery process in stimulated hand muscles, but with limited generalization to other functional deficits. Long-term motor deficits were not impacted by rTMS. Given the reduced life expectancy in these patients a shortened recovery duration of deficits can still be of high significance. Clinical Trial Registration: https://drks.de/DRKS00010043.

Indexed as

gliomamotor deficitpostoperativerehabilitationrepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID38737898
PMCPMC11082392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.