Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Showing posts with label levodopa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label levodopa. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 22, 2025

More ‘Excellent’ Outcomes With Intra-Arterial Alteplase After Successful Reperfusion in Acute Stroke

 Successful reperfusion DOES NOT MEAN 100% RECOVERY! So, complete fucking failure! 100% recovery is the only goal in stroke! Survivors want nothing less, don't try the tyranny of low expectations on them!

More ‘Excellent’ Outcomes With Intra-Arterial Alteplase After Successful Reperfusion in Acute Stroke

Treatment with intra-arterial alteplase after successful endovascular reperfusion resulted in a higher likelihood of excellent outcomes at 90 days among patients with acute, anterior-circulation, large-vessel occlusion stroke. Researchers published the findings in JAMA.

“The incidence of all-cause mortality and any intracranial hemorrhage was higher in patients who received intra-arterial alteplase, although these differences were not statistically significant,” wrote corresponding authors Yamei Tang, MD, PhD, of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China, and Raul G. Nogueira, MD, of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and study coauthors.

The PEARL trial recruited 324 patients with anterior-circulation, large-vessel occlusion stroke who achieved successful reperfusion by mechanical thrombectomy between August 1, 2023, and October 16, 2024, at 28 hospitals in China. Among the patients, 164 were randomized to intra-arterial alteplase treatment with 0.225 mg/kg and 160 to standard treatment that adhered to the latest clinical guidelines. The study’s primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients with an excellent outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 or 1, at 90 days.

>>NEWS: Added Levodopa Does Not Significantly Benefit Stroke Recovery

Really? What about this? 

Ask your doctor what they are using levodopa for in your recovery.  No knowledge is grounds for firing.

Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  back to Sept. 2001.

According to the results, 44.8% of patients in the intra-arterial alteplase group vs 30.2% in the standard treatment group achieved an excellent outcome at 90 days, for an adjusted risk ratio of 1.45. Rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 36 hours were 4.3% with intra-arterial alteplase vs 5.0% with standard treatment group, for an 0.85 adjusted risk ratio.

However, the intra-arterial alteplase group had higher rates of 90-day all-cause mortality and any intracranial hemorrhage within 36 hours. All-cause mortality within 90 days was 17.1% with intra-arterial alteplase vs 11.3% with standard treatment, for an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.60. Any intracranial hemorrhage within 36 hours was 32.9% with intra-arterial alteplase group vs 26.9% with standard treatment, for an adjusted risk ratio of 1.22.

“The evidence from the current trial, the CHOICE trial, and the ANGEL-TNK trial suggests a potential benefit of adjunctive intra-arterial thrombolysis. Meta-analyses, including neutral data from the POST-UK and POST-TNK trials, have also shown a favorable trend in functional outcomes associated with intra-arterial thrombolysis after mechanical thrombectomy,” researchers wrote. “However, the current evidence remains insufficient to fully support intra-arterial thrombolysis after mechanical thrombectomy in clinical practice.”

Wednesday, September 24, 2025

Levodopa Added to Stroke Rehabilitation The ESTREL Randomized Clinical Trial

 Ask your competent? doctor what they are using levodopa for in your recovery.  No knowledge is grounds for firing.

Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  back to Sept. 2001. 

Levodopa Added to Stroke Rehabilitation The ESTREL Randomized Clinical Trial


Stefan T. Engelter,MD Josefin E. Kaufmann, MD, PhD Annaelle Zietz,MD Author Affiliations Article Information  PermissionsJAMA
 Published Online:September22,2025 doi: 10.1001/jama.2025.15185 
Key Points Question Does levodopa therapy added to standardized rehabilitation improve stroke recovery compared with standardized rehabilitation alone? 

Findings  In this randomized clinical trial including 610 participants, motor function at 3 months (measured by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment total score) was not significantly different between the levodopa plus standardized rehabilitation group compared with the placebo plus standardized rehabilitation group (median, 68 points vs 64 points, respectively; adjusted mean between-group difference, −0.90 points). 

Meaning These results do not support routine use of levodopa for motor recovery in unselected patients with stroke undergoing rehabilitation. ImportanceLevodopa enhances dopaminergic signaling and may stimulate neuroplasticity, which could potentially enhance motor recovery after stroke. Levodopa is used in stroke rehabilitation despite mixed evidence for its effectiveness. Objective To determine whether levodopa compared with placebo, administered in addition to standardized rehabilitation based on active task-oriented training, is associated with enhanced motor recovery in patients with acute stroke. 
Design, Setting, and Participants A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial at 13 stroke units and centers and 11 collaborating rehabilitation centers in Switzerland. Between June 14, 2019 (first patient, first visit), and August 27, 2024 (last patient, last visit), 610 patients with acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke with clinically meaningful hemiparesis (ie, a total score of ≥3 points on the following National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale items: motor arm, motor leg, or limb ataxia) were randomized 1:1 to receive levodopa or placebo. Statistical analyses were conducted from November 2024 to August 2025. Patients received levodopa/carbidopa (100 mg/25 mg; n = 307) or placebo (n = 303) 3 times daily for 39 days, alongside standardized rehabilitation therapy based on active task-oriented training. 
Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the adjusted mean between-group difference in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) total score (range, 0-100 points; fewer points indicate worse motor function; 6-point difference considered patient-relevant) at 3 months. Results Among the 610 participants (median [IQR] age, 73 [64-82] years; 252 [41.3%] female; median baseline FMA total score, 34 [14-54]), 28 participants died by 3 months, leaving 582 (95.4%) participants eligible for the primary analysis. At 3 months, the median (IQR) FMA total score was 68 (42-85) points in the levodopa group and 64 (44-83) points in the placebo group. The mean difference in the FMA total score between the levodopa and placebo groups was −0.90 points (95% CI, −3.78 to 1.98; P = .54). There were 126 serious adverse events in the levodopa group and 129 in the placebo group; the most common was infection (levodopa, n = 55; placebo, n = 44).>

 Conclusions and Relevance  In this randomized clinical trial, among patients receiving inpatient rehabilitation for acute stroke, levodopa added to standa

Saturday, April 19, 2025

Neurostimulant Use for Rehabilitation and Recovery After Stroke: A Narrative Literature Review

 I see nothing here that even remotely states what should be done to get recovered! You got published but DID NOTHING for getting survivors recovered!

Neurostimulant Use for Rehabilitation and Recovery After Stroke: A Narrative Literature Review

  • Abstract

    BACKGROUND:

    Stroke often results in significant impairments across various domains, including movement, language, cognition, and mood. Neurostimulants have been proposed as potential therapeutic interventions to enhance recovery in these areas.

    METHODS:

    This narrative literature review examines clinical trials investigating the efficacy of neurostimulants in poststroke recovery. It evaluates outcomes related to aphasia, motor deficits, cognition, fatigue, and depression.

    RESULTS:

    The qualitative analysis included 34 trials testing the following neurostimulants: methylphenidate (n=6), amphetamines (n=8), memantine (n=2), modafinil (n=2), levodopa (n=14), amantadine (n=1), bromocriptine (n=3), and ropinirole (n=1). Of the 34 studies, 31 were randomized, placebo-controlled (double-blind, n=27; single-blind, n=2; unblinded n=2), 2 were randomized and not placebo-controlled, and 1 was not randomized. Study design was either multiarm (n=23), crossover (n=10), or used subjects as their own control (n=1). Mean sample size was 49.4 (5–593).

    CONCLUSIONS:

    Current evidence suggests that memantine may be effective for aphasia, although few phase III trials exist, whereas bromocriptine and amphetamines lack sufficient evidence for long-term recovery of aphasia. Levodopa may improve motor aphasias but has not shown long-term benefits for motor recovery. Similarly, ropinirole has not been shown to improve poststroke motor outcomes. Methylphenidate has limited efficacy for cognitive improvement but may enhance poststroke functionality and mood. Modafinil may help with poststroke fatigue. In conclusion, there are promising results of positive effects of neurostimulants with few side effects, though studies are limited by heterogeneous designs and small sample sizes. Neurostimulant efficacy must be assessed in conjunction with specific rehabilitation modalities as part of larger, well-designed studies to best understand their effects on impairment.

    Graphical Abstract




    Get full access to this article

    Friday, June 14, 2024

    Enhancement of STroke REhabilitation with Levodopa (ESTREL): Rationale and design of a randomized placebo-controlled, double blind superiority trial

     Ask your doctor what they are using levodopa for in your recovery.  No knowledge is grounds for firing.

    Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  back to Sept. 2001.

     

    Enhancement of STroke REhabilitation with Levodopa (ESTREL): Rationale and design of a randomized placebo-controlled, double blind superiority trial

    Abstract

    Rationale:

    Novel therapeutic approaches are needed in stroke recovery. Whether pharmacological therapies are beneficial for enhancing stroke recovery is unclear. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter involved in motor learning, reward, and brain plasticity. Its prodrug levodopa is a promising agent for stroke recovery.

    Aim and hypothesis:

    To investigate the hypothesis that levodopa, in addition to standardized rehabilitation therapy based on active task training, results in an enhancement of functional recovery in acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke patients compared to placebo.

    Design:

    ESTREL (Enhancement of Stroke REhabilitation with Levodopa) is a randomized (ratio 1:1), multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group superiority trial.

    Participants:

    610 participants (according to sample size calculation) with a clinically meaningful hemiparesis will be enrolled ⩽7 days after stroke onset. Key eligibility criteria include (i) in-hospital-rehabilitation required, (ii) capability to participate in rehabilitation, (iii) previous independence in daily living.

    Intervention:

    Levodopa 100 mg/carbidopa 25 mg three times daily, administered for 5 weeks in addition to standardized rehabilitation. The study intervention will be initiated within 7 days after stroke onset.

    Comparison:

    Matching placebo plus standardized rehabilitation.

    Outcomes:

    The primary outcome is the between-group difference of the Fugl-Meyer-Motor Assessment (FMMA) total score measured 3 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported health and wellbeing (PROMIS 10 and 29), patient-reported assessment of improvement, Rivermead Mobility Index, modified Rankin Scale, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and as measures of harm: mortality, recurrent stroke, and serious adverse events.

    Conclusion:

    The ESTREL trial will provide evidence of whether the use of Levodopa in addition to standardized rehabilitation in stroke patients leads to better functional recovery compared to rehabilitation alone.

    Thursday, May 11, 2023

    Novel Levodopa Delivery System Promises Continuous Dosing Without Surgery or Pump

    Ask your doctor what they are using levodopa for in your recovery.  No knowledge is grounds for firing.

    Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  back to Sept. 2001. 

     

    Novel Levodopa Delivery System Promises Continuous Dosing Without Surgery or Pump

    BOSTON – A novel levodopa/carbidopa delivery system fitted to a retainer worn in the mouth appears to achieve the advantages of continuous drug delivery without the need for surgery or external pumps, according to an early clinical experience described in the Emerging Science session at the 2023 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

    C. Warren Olanow, MD

    On this device, the attenuation of levodopa fluctuations “translated into dramatic improvements in clinical behavior, including highly significant reductions in OFF time and an increase in ON time with no dyskinesias,” reported C. Warren Olanow, MD, who is a chairman emeritus of the department of neurology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and now an employee of the company developing this new device.

    A novel strategy

    Numerous studies have demonstrated that reductions in the troughs of plasma levodopa associated with oral dosing result in longer ON time with fewer dyskinesias, according to Dr. Olanow, who explained this has led to strategies for numerous strategies to achieve continuous delivery. A device that delivers levodopa into the stomach through a surgically implanted catheter has already received regulatory approval. Other devices delivering levodopa subcutaneously are in development, but Dr. Olanow said each of these has had limitations.

    “The problem with these approaches is they are associated with potentially serious side effects and they require the patient to wear a cumbersome device,” he explained. Relative to the subcutaneous delivery systems, which have been associated with injection site reactions that include painful nodules, and the surgically implanted devices, which also require an external pump, the latest strategy avoids both disadvantages.

    Called DopaFuse, the experimental device is designed to deliver the levodopa and carbidopa into the mouth through a micropump within a wearable retainer. Dr. Olanow said that previous experimental studies demonstrated that small doses of levodopa delivered by mouth to the gastrointestinal system reduce levodopa plasma variability. This early clinical study supports that premise. Levodopa delivered into the mouth by way of a propellant in the retainer-mounted pump improved clinical endpoints.

    Encouraging trial results

    In the study, 16 patients between the ages of 30 and 75 with Parkinson’s disease were enrolled. On day 1, they received an oral dose of levodopa/carbidopa consistent with their current treatment. On day 2, levodopa/carbidopa was delivered through the retainer-mounted device at equivalent doses. On day 3, they received a single morning oral dose and the received the remainder of their levodopa/carbidopa regimen through the device. On days 4 to 14, they received treatment in the same schedule as day 3.

    When pharmacokinetics of levodopa on day 3 were compared with those on day 1, the fluctuation index and coefficient of levodopa concentration variability was reduced to a degree that was highly statistically significant (P < .0001). This, in turn, correlated with “striking” reductions in OFF time with equally statistically significant improvement in ON time and ON time without dyskinesias, according to Dr. Olanow.

    Relative to an OFF time of 3.2 hours on day 1, the OFF time of 1.6 hours on day 3 represented a 50% reduction (P < .0001). ON time improved from 12.8 hours to 14.5 hours (< .001). ON time without dyskinesias improved numerically from 8.8 hours to 9.6 hours.

    “There were also improvements in activities of daily living when patients were on DopaFuse, which is a hard endpoint to reach in a study with such a small sample size,” Dr. Olanow reported.

    There were no serious adverse events. Three patients reported vomiting and two patients each reported headache, but these events were mild and all resolved within a day. Three patients reported buccal lesions, but these also resolved within a day.

    “Some patients reported trouble with speaking in the beginning but at the end of the study, patients were reporting that it was easier to speak because of the motor improvements,” Dr. Olanow said.

    Overall, the device was well tolerated by the subjects, providing the evidence for the next stages of clinical studies, reported Dr. Olanow.

    “If this turns out to be what we hope it is, it will allow us to deliver levodopa without motor complications, without need for a surgical procedure, and without the risk of subcutaneous lesions,” Dr. Olanow said.

    More delivery strategies are needed

    This device is in an early phase of development, but several specialists in Parkinson’s disease agreed that there is a need for more strategies to provide continuous levodopa in patients with advancing symptoms. Stuart Isaacson, MD, director, Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders Center of Boca Raton, Fla., is among them.

    “Novel delivery devices that can provide more continuous levodopa delivery would be an important therapeutic advance,” Dr. Isaacson said. He called levodopa “the cornerstone of treatment through the course of Parkinson’s disease,” but more physiologic dosing in advancing disease has been a challenge.

    “While there are many therapies currently available to manage OFF time, many people living with Parkinson’s disease continue to spend only half of their waking day with good ON time,” he added.

    The currently approved method of delivering continuous levodopa through a surgically placed catheter into the gastrointestinal system is effective, but has limitations, according to Aaron L. Ellenbogen, MD, a neurologist at Beaumont Hospital, Farmington Hills, Mich.

    “One of the challenges with the current treatment landscape of Parkinson’s disease is that medication can be absorbed variably through the gastrointestinal system,” he said. “As the disease progresses, this often becomes more troublesome.” Although this new device is likely to share this issue, Dr. Ellenbogen said that several devices might be useful to match patients with the one that works best for them.

    Dr. Olanow is the founder and CEO of Clintrex Research Corporation, through which he also serves as chief medical officer of SynAgile, the company developing DopaFuse. Dr. Isaacson has financial relationships with more than 30 companies, including those that produce levodopa and levodopa delivery systems. Dr. Ellenbogen has financial relationships with Allergan, Acorda, Supernus, and Teva.

    For more news, follow Medscape on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube

    This article originally appeared on MDedge.com, part of the Medscape Professional Network.

     

    Tuesday, August 9, 2022

    ENHANCEMENT OF STROKE REHABILITATION WITH LEVODOPA (ESTRELSTUDY) - DESIGN AND PROGRESS OF THE ONGOING MULTICENTER PLACEBO CONTROLLED RANDOMIZED TRIAL

    Just why was this research needed? You're so fucking incompetent you didn't know of all this earlier research? I'd fire the lot of you.

     ENHANCEMENT OF STROKE REHABILITATION WITH LEVODOPA (ESTRELSTUDY) - DESIGN AND PROGRESS OF THE ONGOING MULTICENTER PLACEBO CONTROLLED RANDOMIZED TRIAL 

    European Stroke Journal ; 7(1 SUPPL):162-163, 2022.
    Artigo em Inglês | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1928085

    Background:

    In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial we study whether Levodopa given in addition to usual rehabilitative therapies is associated with a patient-relevant enhancement of motor recovery after acute stroke.

    Methods:

    ESTREL (Enhancement of Stroke REhabilitation with Levodopa) is a multicenter, placebo-controlled randomized superiority trial. Patients with an acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke ≤7 days leading to a clinically meaningful hemiparesis in need of in-hospital rehabilitation are enrolled in stroke units and later transferred to experienced neurorehabilitation centers. Participants receive Levodopa 100mg/Carbidopa 25mg three times daily or matching placebo for 5 weeks in addition to standardized rehabilitative therapy. The primary outcome is the Fugl-Meyer- Motor Assessment score 3 months after randomization. We present the characteristics of the first 200 of 610 patients to be enrolled.

    Results:

    13 certified stroke units and 13 neurorehabilitation centers are involved (“stroke-pathway-trial”). The first 200 participants had a median age of 73 [IQR 64-82] years and 43.5 % were female. 169 patients (84.5%) had ischemic stroke. At baseline, the median NIH-Stroke scale score was 8 [5-10]. Successful 3-month assessment was performed in 183 patients (91.5%);11 (5%) died, 5 (2.5%) withdrew from the study and 1 patient missed the clinical 3 months-visit due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Conclusions:

    The ESTREL study will provide evidence whether the additional use of Levodopa in the rehabilitation process of stroke patients is safe and effective. The ESTREL-study started successfully due to the good cooperation between acute stroke units and rehabilitation centers, as well as the high acceptance rate among patients.

    Wednesday, July 1, 2020

    Levodopa Facilitates Prefrontal Cortex Activation During Dual Task Walking in Parkinson Disease

    Ask your doctor what they are using levodopa for in your recovery.  No knowledge is grounds for firing.

    Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  back to Sept. 2001. 

     

     

    Levodopa Facilitates Prefrontal Cortex Activation During Dual Task Walking in Parkinson Disease

    First Published May 25, 2020 Research Article Find in PubMed



    Background.
    Although dopaminergic medication improves dual task walking in people with Parkinson disease (PD), the underlying neural mechanisms are not yet fully understood. As prefrontal cognitive resources are involved in dual task walking, evaluation of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is required. Objective.
    To investigate the effect of dopaminergic medication on PFC activity and gait parameters during dual task walking in people with PD.  
    Methods.
    A total of 20 individuals with PD (69.8 ± 5.9 years) and 30 healthy older people (68.0 ± 5.6 years) performed 2 walking conditions: single and dual task (walking while performing a digit vigilance task). A mobile functional near infrared spectroscopy system and an electronic sensor carpet were used to analyze PFC activation and gait parameters, respectively. Relative concentrations of oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO2) from the left and right PFC were measured.  
    Results.
    People with PD in the off state did not present changes in HbO2 level in the left PFC across walking conditions. In contrast, in the on state, they presented increased HbO2 levels during dual task compared with single task. Regardless of medication state, people with PD presented increased HbO2 levels in the right PFC during dual task walking compared with single task. The control group demonstrated increased PFC activity in both hemispheres during dual task compared with single task. People with PD showed increases in both step length and velocity in the on state compared with the off state.  
    Conclusions.
    PD limits the activation of the left PFC during dual task walking, and dopaminergic medication facilitates its recruitment.

    Thursday, July 18, 2019

    Dopamine Augmented Rehabilitation in Stroke (DARS): a multicentre double-blind, randomised controlled trial of co-careldopa compared with placebo, in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy, delivered early after stroke on functional recovery

    Interesting because co-careldopa contains two drugs and levodopa already has proven useful in stroke. Ask your doctor what they are using levodopa for in your recovery.  No knowledge is grounds for firing.

    Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  back to Sept. 2001.

    Dopamine Augmented Rehabilitation in Stroke (DARS): a multicentre double-blind, randomised controlled trial of co-careldopa compared with placebo, in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy, delivered early after stroke on functional recovery

    Source

    Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2019 Jul.
    Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation.

    Excerpt

    BACKGROUND:

    Dopamine is a key modulator of striatal function and learning, and may improve motor recovery after stroke. Seven small trials of dopamine agonists after stroke have provided equivocal evidence of the clinical effectiveness of dopamine agonists in improving motor recovery.

    DESIGN:

    Dopamine Augmented Rehabilitation in Stroke was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with stroke patients randomised to receive 6 weeks of co-careldopa (Sinemet®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd) or placebo in combination with occupational and physical rehabilitation.

    METHODS:

    The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients walking independently at 8 weeks [Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI) score of ≥ 7 points and ‘yes’ to item 7 on the RMI]. Secondary outcome measures assessed physical functioning, pain, cognition, mood, fatigue and carer burden at 8 weeks, 6 months and 12 months.

    RESULTS:

    Between May 2011 and March 2014, 593 patients (mean age 68.5 years) and 165 carers (mean age 59.7 years) were recruited from stroke rehabilitation units; 308 patients were randomised to co-careldopa and 285 to placebo at a median of 15 days following stroke onset. The study drug was to be taken 45–60 minutes before therapy, which included motor activities (mean 23.2 and 24.8 sessions in the co-careldopa and placebo groups, respectively). The mean number of investigational medicinal product doses taken was 20.6 in the co-careldopa group and 22.4 in the placebo group. Ability to walk independently was not improved at 8 weeks [40.6% (co-careldopa) vs. 44.6% (placebo); odds ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 1.15], 6 months [51.6% (co-careldopa) vs. 53.3% (placebo)] or 12 months [51.6% (co-careldopa) vs. 56.8% (placebo)]. There were no significant differences for Barthel Index, Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living, ABILHAND Manual Ability Measure or Modified Rankin Scale, pain or fatigue at any time point. Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores did not significantly differ; the majority of participants had cognitive impairment at baseline, which improved during 12 months’ follow-up. No difference was observed in General Health Questionnaire 12-item version scores between groups at 8 weeks and 12 months but, at 6 months, those in the co-careldopa group reported significantly better general health [mean difference (MD) –1.33, 95% CI –2.57 to –0.10]. Mortality at 12 months was not significantly different. Carers in the placebo group reported significantly greater burden at 6 months (MD 5.05, 95% CI 0.10 to 10.01) and 12 months (MD 7.52, 95% CI 1.87 to 13.18).

    CONCLUSION:

    Co-careldopa in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy is not clinically effective or cost-effective in improving walking, physical functioning, mood or cognition following stroke. We recommend further research to develop imaging and clinical markers that would allow identification of promising drug therapies that would enhance motor therapy in improving walking ability and arm function. Further research is needed to compare strategies of giving drug therapy intermittently immediately prior to therapy sessions or as continuous background daily administration.

    LIMITATIONS:

    In total, 10.3% of patients were lost to follow-up at 8 weeks and < 10% of patients met the strict per-protocol definition. Despite this, the findings are robust and generalisable to patients with limited mobility in the first few weeks after stroke.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION:

    Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99643613.

    FUNDING:

    This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership.
    Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2019. This work was produced by Ford et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.

    Wednesday, April 3, 2019

    Effects of Dopamine on Motor Recovery and Training in Adults and Children With Nonprogressive Neurological Injuries: A Systematic Review

    Shit, asking for followup because you didn't want to do the research that would prove efficacy one way or the other.  LAZY.  Systematic reviews are lazy. 

    But this from Sept. 2001 shows you that nothing is ever done in stroke.

    Early Promise For Stroke Patients Given - levodopa  Sept. 2001

    And the latest useless stuff here:

    Effects of Dopamine on Motor Recovery and Training in Adults and Children With Nonprogressive Neurological Injuries: A Systematic Review 

    First Published March 27, 2019 Review Article







    Background. The strong link between dopamine and motor learning has been well-established in the animal literature with similar findings reported in healthy adults and the elderly.  
    Objective. We aimed to conduct the first, to our knowledge, systematic review of the literature on the evidence for the effects of dopaminergic medications or genetic variations in dopamine transmission on motor recovery or learning after a nonprogressive neurological injury.  
    Methods. A PubMed search was conducted up until April 2018 for all English articles including participants with nonprogressive neurological injury such as cerebral palsy, stroke, spinal cord injury, and traumatic brain injury; quantitative motor outcomes; and assessments of the dopaminergic system or medications.
    Results. The search yielded 237 articles, from which we identified 26 articles meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria. The vast majority of articles were related to the use of levodopa poststroke; however, several studies assessed the effects of different medications and/or were on individuals with traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury or cerebral palsy.  
    Conclusions. The evidence suggests that a brain injury can decrease dopamine transmission and that levodopa may have a positive effect on motor outcomes poststroke, although evidence is not conclusive or consistent. Individual variations in genes related to dopamine transmission may also influence the response to motor skill training during neurorehabilitation and the extent to which dopaminergic medications or interventions can augment that response. More rigorous safety and efficacy studies of levodopa and dopaminergic medications in stroke and particularly other neurological injuries including genetic analyses are warranted.

    Sunday, December 30, 2018

    BREAKING: FDA Approves New Parkinsons Drug Funded by MJFF

    I see nothing from our fucking failures of stroke associations that suggests they are even working on anything that might solve all the problems in stroke. Do they not even have enough brains to contact MJFF and use their processes to solve stroke? 5 easy steps. 

    1.  Describe the problem exactly. 
    2.  Write an RFP to researchers to solve that problem.
    3.  Fund them with foundation grants.
    4.  Write stroke rehab protocols based on the research.
    5.  Get the Nobel prize in medicine  

     

    BREAKING: FDA Approves New PD Drug Funded by MJFF

    On Friday, December 21, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Inbrija, an inhaled levodopa powder, for the treatment of "off" episodes when Parkinson's symptoms are not well controlled with oral medication.

    This highly anticipated news marks another significant milestone in The Michael J. Fox Foundation's (MJFF) short history. This is the first regulatory approval of a Parkinson's treatment directly funded by the Foundation.

    MJFF's "de-risking" approach identifies, funds and keeps the most promising, high-risk, high-reward ideas in Parkinson's research moving forward. Read more about how we funded Inbrija in early stages of development, helping its maker drive the new treatment across the finish line and into patients' hands.


    Read More 

     
    P.S. It's not too late to help MJFF speed the next breakthrough therapy from the laboratory to pharmacy shelves and Parkinson's patients. Your year-end gift today will be put to work right away to help fulfill the promise of tomorrow's new research and treatments.

    Thursday, April 27, 2017

    Parkinson’s Relief May Come From a 150-Year-Old Drug

    You may need this, ask your doctor for Parkinson prevention protocols.

    Parkinson’s Disease May Have Link to Stroke


    Parkinson’s Relief May Come From a 150-Year-Old Drug 

    Thu, 04/27/2017 - 3:14pm
    by Kenny Walter - Digital Reporter -

    Friday, August 5, 2016

    Potential of Stimulants to Augment Rehabilitation in the Acute Stroke Setting: Preliminary Support

    Maybe these also? This joins marijuana, ecstasy and levodopa as possible help in stroke recovery. 

    Potential of Stimulants to Augment Rehabilitation in the Acute Stroke Setting: Preliminary Support 



    enny M. Ngo
    1
    , Michael Korsmo
    1
    , Karen C. Albright
    2,3
    , Mansi M. Jhaveri
    4,5
    ,
    Ramy E. l. Khoury
    1
    and Sheryl Martin-Schild
    1*
    1
    Department of Neurology, Tulane University Hospital,
    New Orleans, LA 70112, United States.
    2
    Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health,
    University of Alabama at Birmingham,
    Alabama, United States.
    3
    Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (G
    RECC), Birmingham Veteran Affairs,
    Birmingham, Alabama 35233 United States.
    4
    Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Un
    iversity of Texas Health Sciences Center at
    Houston, Houston, Texas 77030, United States.
    5
    Department of Neurology, University of Texas Health Scie
    nces Center at Houston, Houston,
    Texas 77030, United States. 
    DOI: 10.9734/INDJ/2016/20621
    Editor(s):
    (1) Zhefeng Guo, Department of Neurology, Universit
    y of California, Los Angeles, USA.
    Reviewers:
    (1)
    Adria Arboix, University of Barcelona, Spain.
    (2)
    Xing Li, Mayo Clinic, USA.
    Complete Peer review History:
    http://sciencedomain.org/review-history/11571
    Received 1
    st
    August 2015
    Accepted 2
    nd
    September 2015
    Published 27
    th
    September 2015
    Case Study
    Ngo et al.; INDJ, 5(1): 1-6, 2016; Article no.INDJ.
    20621
    2
    ABSTRACT
    Aims:
    The objective of these case studies is to explore the possibility of using neurostimulants
    during the acute stage of stroke to facilitate effective rehabilitation of patients with severe strokes.
    Presentation of Cases:
    In Case 1, methylphenidate was administered to a 63 year old woman with a left anterior cerebral artery infarct who was discharged to inpatient rehabilitation, rather than
    original recommendation of skilled nursing facility, prior to returning home. In Case 2, modafinil was administered to a 56 year old man with a left middle cerebral artery infarct who was discharged to inpatient rehabilitation prior to returning home. In Case 3, modafinil was administered to a 66 year old man with a left middle cerebral arery infarct who was discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. In Case 4, modafinil and methylphenidate were co-administered to a patient with a hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage who experienced an adverse event possibly related to neurostimulants resulting in discontinuation. She was discharged to
    inpatient rehabilitation and subsequently to a skilled nursing facility.
    Discussion: All cases initially presented to therapists with barriers to inpatient rehabilitation.
    Following neurostimulant administration, therapies recommended discharge to inpatient
    rehabilitation facility due to improvement in initial barriers. Three out of the four cases tolerated the neurostimulant well, while one case required discontinuation due to an adverse event.
    Conclusion: Patients with severe strokes are less likely to meet criteria for inpatient rehabilitation. Depressed consciousness and limited attention are major barriers for which neurostimulants may be of benefit in the acute post-stroke setting. Administration of neurostimulants may improve participation in therapy, thus increasing qualification for inpatient rehabilitation, and ultimately accelerate recovery. Safety data in this population during the acute stage of stroke are lacking.