Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language Disorders
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language Disorders 18 33-39 April 2008.
doi:10.1044/nnsld18.1.33 Copyright 2008 by American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cherney, L. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content

Cortical Stimulation and Aphasia: The State of the Science

Leora R. Cherney

Center for Aphasia Research, Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago
Chicago, IL

Purpose: Biological approaches to aphasia rehabilitation involve procedures aimed to alter brain anatomy and physiology so that language function can be restored. One such approach is the application of electrical stimulation to the cerebral cortex to facilitate brain plasticity and enhance stroke recovery.

Method: This article discusses the rationale for the application of cortical stimulation and reviews three different methods of delivering cortical brain stimulation—repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and epidural cortical stimulation. Each of these methods has been applied to the rehabilitation of language after stroke, and some of the key studies that have addressed the use of cortical stimulation as a potential treatment for post-stroke aphasia are described.

Conclusions: Pilot results suggest a potential role for cortical stimulation as an adjuvant strategy in aphasia rehabilitation. Further investigation of each method of stimulation and its impact on language recovery is warranted. Suggestions for the direction of future research are discussed.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Copyright 2008 by American Speech-Language-Hearing Association