Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as a therapy for post-stroke dysphagia: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Post-stroke dysphagia is a common swallowing disorder that occurs after a stroke, leading to an increased risk of aspiration pneumonia and malnutrition. There is a pressing need for effective and safe interventions for its rehabilitation. This review aims to answer two key scientific questions: (1) What is the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the rehabilitation of post-stroke dysphagia? (2) Is repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation a safe intervention for post-stroke dysphagia? DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was conducted across four electronic databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. The search aimed to identify relevant studies concerning our topic of interest and was completed on 28 May 2024. REVIEW METHODS: In accordance with the PRISMA checklist, a comprehensive search of four databases was conducted, which identified 13 relevant systematic reviews. The inclusion criteria were systematic reviews that evaluated the efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia. Exclusion criteria were reviews that did not focus on post-stroke dysphagia or did not evaluate repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as a therapeutic intervention. The quality, bias, reporting, and overall evidence quality of these reviews were assessed using validated tools, including the AMSTAR 2 tool for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews, the ROBIS tool for assessing the risk of bias, and the GRADE approach for evaluating the overall quality of evidence. This rigorous approach ensures that our review provides a comprehensive and reliable overview of the current state of knowledge on the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia. RESULTS: The sample sizes for the individual studies included in the systematic reviews/meta-analyses ranged from 66 to 555. The total number of participants across all studies included in the overall analyses was 752. The evidence was limited by the methodological flaws and heterogeneity of the systematic reviews. The quality of the evidence varied from high to low, with most outcomes having moderate quality. Future research should adopt more rigorous, standardized, and comprehensive designs to confirm the efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia. The main reason for downgrading the evidence quality was the small sample size and high heterogeneity of the primary studies. CONCLUSION: This overview synthesized research on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for dysphagia, aiming to inform clinical and policy decisions. However, the current evidence does not conclusively establish the safety and efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia rehabilitation. The studies reviewed varied in quality, and many were of poor quality. Therefore, while some studies suggest potential benefits of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, these findings should be interpreted with caution. There is a pressing need for more rigorous, high-quality research to validate the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia rehabilitation. The implications of these findings for clinical practice and policy will be clearer once we have more robust, evidence-based recommendations.