Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Sep;26(3):458-462.
doi: 10.5853/jos.2024.01529. Epub 2024 Sep 27.

Neuroprotective Effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields in Acute Stroke

Fioravante Capone  1   2 , Andrea Zini  3 , Franco Valzania  4 , Marina Diomedi  5 , Valeria Tugnoli  6 , Letizia Leocani  7   8 , Giancarlo Comi  9 , Nicoletta Anzalone  8 , Sara Contardi  3 , Micol Colella  10 , Micaela Liberti  10 , Simona Salati  11 , Stefania Setti  11 , Ruggero Cadossi  11 , Vincenzo Di Lazzaro  1   2
Affiliations

Neuroprotective Effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields in Acute Stroke

Fioravante Capone et al. J Stroke. 2024 Sep.
No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest

FC has received travel grants and/or speaking honoraria from Biogen, Merck, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Roche and research grants from Merck, which are not relevant to this work. AZ reported consultancies with Bayer, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and CSL Behring, which were not relevant to this work. RC owns shares in IGEA. SSa and SSe are employees of IGEA.

The other authors have no conflicting interests to declare.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
CONSORT study flow diagram. CONSORT, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; FU, follow-up; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging. *Of the 16 patients in the active group, 14 were available for analysis at the 7-day FU: two patients were excluded from the analysis because they did not meet the inclusion criteria “2” and “3” (Supplementary Methods); 11 patients were available for analysis at the 45-day and 90-day FUs: three patients did not return for follow-up visit during the COVID-19 pandemic, but when interviewed by telephone, they were in good health and did not mention any negative effect related to the treatment; †Of the 21 patients in the placebo group, 20 were available for analysis at the 7-day FU: one patient was excluded from the analysis because he did not meet the inclusion criteria “3” (Supplementary Methods), 19 patients were available for analysis at the 45-day and 90-day FUs: one patient died from causes unrelated to the treatment.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Primary and secondary outcomes. (A) Line graph showing mean lesion volumes (±SE) at baseline, 7 days, and 45 days in the placebo and active groups. (B) Normalized MRI volume reduction (mean±SE). (C) Distribution of scores on the mRS at 90 days. (D) BI over time in the active and placebo groups (mean±SE). (E) NIHSS over time in the active and placebo groups (mean±SE). SE, standard error; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; mRS, modified Rankin Scale; BI, Barthel Index; NIHSS, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. *P<0.05; **P<0.01; †P=nonsignificant (vs. baseline).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Subgroup analysis. (A) Line graph showing mean lesion volumes (±SE) at baseline, 7 days, and 45 days in the placebo and active groups. (B) NIHSS score (means±SE) over time in the active and placebo. NIHSS score significantly improved over baseline in both groups. (C) Distribution of scores on the mRS at 90 days. Excellent outcome at 90 days was achieved in 85.7% of patients in the active group and in 63.6% of patients in the placebo group (P=0.634). (D) BI score (means±SE) over time in the active and placebo groups. The BI score improved from 42.5±30.9 at baseline to 92.9±16.8 (PP<0.01) at 90 days in the active group; whilst in the placebo group, BI increased from 54.2±37.2 at baseline to 82.7±37.2 (P=0.100) at 90 days. SE, standard error; NIHSS, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; mRS, modified Rankin Scale; BI, Barthel Index. *P<0.05; **P<0.01; †P=nonsignificant (vs. baseline).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Chamorro Á, Dirnagl U, Urra X, Planas AM. Neuroprotection in acute stroke: targeting excitotoxicity, oxidative and nitrosative stress, and inflammation. Lancet Neurol. 2016;15:869–881. - PubMed
    1. Borea PA, Gessi S, Merighi S, Varani K. Adenosine as a multisignalling guardian angel in human diseases: when, where and how does it exert its protective effects? Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2016;37:419–434. - PubMed
    1. Capone F, Salati S, Vincenzi F, Liberti M, Aicardi G, Apollonio F, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic fields: a novel attractive therapeutic opportunity for neuroprotection after acute cerebral ischemia. Neuromodulation. 2022;25:1240–1247. - PubMed
    1. Melani A, Corti F, Cellai L, Vannucchi MG, Pedata F. Low doses of the selective adenosine A2A receptor agonist CGS21680 are protective in a rat model of transient cerebral ischemia. Brain Res. 2014;1551:59–72. - PubMed
    1. Choi IY, Lee JC, Ju C, Hwang S, Cho GS, Lee HW, et al. A3 adenosine receptor agonist reduces brain ischemic injury and inhibits inflammatory cell migration in rats. Am J Pathol. 2011;179:2042–2052. - PMC - PubMed

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources