Dataset Information

Anatomy and physiology predict response to motor cortex stimulation after stroke.

ABSTRACT: Preclinical studies found that epidural motor cortex stimulation improved motor deficits after stroke, but a phase III trial in humans did not corroborate these results. The current retrospective analysis examined subjects randomized to stimulation in order to identify features distinguishing responders from nonresponders.Anatomic (MRI measures of gray matter thickness and of white matter tract injury) and physiologic methods (motor evoked responses) were examined as predictors of treatment response.Among 60 subjects randomized to cortical stimulation, both anatomic and physiologic measures at baseline predicted behavioral response to therapy. Anatomically, those achieving the primary efficacy endpoint had a smaller fraction of the corticospinal tract injured by stroke compared to those who did not (44% vs 72%, p < 0.04), and rarely had severe tract injury. Physiologically, the primary efficacy endpoint was reached more often (67%) by those with preserved motor evoked responses (MER) upon cortical stimulation compared to those lacking MER (27%, p < 0.05). Those with an elicitable MER also had a lower rate of precentral gyrus injury (0% vs 33%, p < 0.05) by stroke, as compared to those lacking MER, and had higher gray matter volume compared to those lacking MER in regions including ipsilesional precentral gyrus.In this clinical stroke trial, the more that the physiologic integrity of the motor system was preserved, the more likely that a patient was to derive gains from subsequent therapy, consistent with preclinical models. Functional and structural preservation of key brain substrates are important to deriving gain from a restorative therapy.

SUBMITTER: Nouri S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3265049 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Anatomy and physiology predict response to motor cortex stimulation after stroke.

Nouri Sarvenaz S Cramer Steven C SC

Neurology 20110831 11

<h4>Objectives</h4>Preclinical studies found that epidural motor cortex stimulation improved motor deficits after stroke, but a phase III trial in humans did not corroborate these results. The current retrospective analysis examined subjects randomized to stimulation in order to identify features distinguishing responders from nonresponders.<h4>Methods</h4>Anatomic (MRI measures of gray matter thickness and of white matter tract injury) and physiologic methods (motor evoked responses) were exami ...[more]

PMID: 21880996

Similar Datasets

Project description:While motor recovery following mild stroke has been extensively studied with neuroimaging, mechanisms of recovery after moderate to severe strokes of the types that are often the focus for novel restorative therapies remain obscure. We used fMRI to: 1) characterize reorganization occurring after moderate to severe subacute stroke, 2) identify brain regions associated with motor recovery and 3) to test whether brain activity associated with passive movement measured in the subacute period could predict motor outcome six months later. Because many patients with large strokes involving sensorimotor regions cannot engage in voluntary movement, we used passive flexion-extension of the paretic wrist to compare 21 patients with subacute ischemic stroke to 24 healthy controls one month after stroke. Clinical motor outcome was assessed with Fugl-Meyer motor scores (motor-FMS) six months later. Multiple regression, with predictors including baseline (one-month) motor-FMS and sensorimotor network regional activity (ROI) measures, was used to determine optimal variable selection for motor outcome prediction. Sensorimotor network ROIs were derived from a meta-analysis of arm voluntary movement tasks. Bootstrapping with 1000 replications was used for internal model validation. During passive movement, both control and patient groups exhibited activity increases in multiple bilateral sensorimotor network regions, including the primary motor (MI), premotor and supplementary motor areas (SMA), cerebellar cortex, putamen, thalamus, insula, Brodmann area (BA) 44 and parietal operculum (OP1-OP4). Compared to controls, patients showed: 1) lower task-related activity in ipsilesional MI, SMA and contralesional cerebellum (lobules V-VI) and 2) higher activity in contralesional MI, superior temporal gyrus and OP1-OP4. Using multiple regression, we found that the combination of baseline motor-FMS, activity in ipsilesional MI (BA4a), putamen and ipsilesional OP1 predicted motor outcome measured 6 months later (adjusted-R2 = 0.85; bootstrap p < 0.001). Baseline motor-FMS alone predicted only 54% of the variance. When baseline motor-FMS was removed, the combination of increased activity in ipsilesional MI-BA4a, ipsilesional thalamus, contralesional mid-cingulum, contralesional OP4 and decreased activity in ipsilesional OP1, predicted better motor outcome (djusted-R2 = 0.96; bootstrap p < 0.001). In subacute stroke, fMRI brain activity related to passive movement measured in a sensorimotor network defined by activity during voluntary movement predicted motor recovery better than baseline motor-FMS alone. Furthermore, fMRI sensorimotor network activity measures considered alone allowed excellent clinical recovery prediction and may provide reliable biomarkers for assessing new therapies in clinical trial contexts. Our findings suggest that neural reorganization related to motor recovery from moderate to severe stroke results from balanced changes in ipsilesional MI (BA4a) and a set of phylogenetically more archaic sensorimotor regions in the ventral sensorimotor trend, in which OP1 and OP4 processes may complement the ipsilesional dorsal motor cortex in achieving compensatory sensorimotor recovery.

Project description:Background: Resting Motor threshold (rMT) is one of the measurement obtained by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) that reflects corticospinal excitability. As a functional marker of the corticospinal pathway, the question arises whether rMT is a suitable biomarker for predicting post-stroke upper limb function. To that aim, we conducted a systematic review of relevant studies that investigated the clinical significance of rMT in stroke survivors by using correlations between upper limb motor scores and rMT. Methods: Studies that reported correlations between upper limb motor function and rMT as a measure of corticospinal excitability in distal arm muscle were identified via a literature search in stroke patients. Two authors extracted the data using a home-made specific form. Subgroup analyses were carried out with patients classified with respect to time post-stroke onset (early vs. chronic stage) and stroke location (cortical, subcortical, or cortico-subcortical). Methodological quality of the study was also evaluated by a published checklist. Results: Eighteen studies with 22 groups (n = 508 stroke patients) were included in this systematic review. Mean methodological quality score was 14.75/24. rMT was often correlated with motor function or hand dexterity (n = 15/22, 68%), explaining on average 31% of the variance of the motor score. Moreover, the results did not seem impacted if patients were examined at the early or chronic stages of stroke. Two findings could not be properly interpreted: (i) the fact that the rMT is an independent predictor of motor function as several confounding factors are well-established, and, (ii) whether the stroke location impacts this prediction. Conclusion: Most of the studies found a correlation between rMT and upper limb motor function after stroke. However, it is still unclear if rMT is an independent predictor of upper limb motor function when taking into account for age, time post stroke onset and level of corticospinal tract damage as confounding factors. Clear-cut conclusions could not be drawn at that time but our results suggest that rMT could be a suitable candidate although future investigations are needed. Systematic Review Registration Number: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/): ID 114317.

Dataset Information

Anatomy and physiology predict response to motor cortex stimulation after stroke.

Publications

Anatomy and physiology predict response to motor cortex stimulation after stroke.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets