Efficacy of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Mitigating Muscle Mass Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Muscle NerveSep 4, 2026 (epub)

Yang Jiang, Yemei Gao, Renxian Wang et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined randomized controlled trials of stand-alone neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for muscle mass in adults with sarcopenia or secondary muscle loss. Eighteen trials involving 676 participants contributed 19 effect estimates. Compared with control conditions, NMES was associated with greater muscle mass (SMD = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.30-1.02), although heterogeneity was substantial and the evidence was rated low certainty. Findings varied across populations and assessment methods; community-dwelling older adults showed the most consistent benefit, while hemodialysis patients showed no clear improvement.

Key findings

  • NMES improved muscle mass versus control conditions (SMD = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.30-1.02), with substantial heterogeneity.
  • Community-dwelling older adults showed the most consistent benefit; hemodialysis patients showed no clear improvement.
  • CT/DXA-based assessments produced larger estimates than ultrasound-based regional measures or indirect methods.
  • Meta-regression suggested a potential positive association between pulse width and effect size; stimulation site and intervention duration were not clearly associated with effects.

Why it matters

Muscle-mass loss occurs in adults with sarcopenia and secondary muscle loss, but evidence for NMES as a stand-alone approach has been fragmented. This synthesis suggests a possible benefit while highlighting variation by population and measurement method. The low certainty and substantial heterogeneity mean the pooled estimate should be interpreted cautiously, and standardized protocols and clinically meaningful outcomes remain important research needs.

What to keep in mind

Evidence was low certainty and substantially heterogeneous. The abstract also identifies variation in populations, stimulation parameters, and muscle-mass assessment methods.

Source

Published in Muscle Nerve. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Geriatrics

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.