Functional reorganization of the cerebral motor system after stroke

Current Opinion in Neurology

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 725-730

  Ward, Nick S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cerebral reorganization; Functional magnetic resonance imaging; Motor system; Stroke; Transcranial magnetic stimulation

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOR; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN INFARCTION; COGNITION; CONVALESCENCE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; LEARNING; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MOTOR CORTEX; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; MOTOR SYSTEM; NERVE CELL NETWORK; NEUROANATOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; REVIEW; SENSORY STIMULATION; SKILL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAINING; TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION;

CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MEMBRANE POTENTIALS; MOTOR CORTEX; MOVEMENT DISORDERS; NERVE NET; NEURAL INHIBITION; NEURONAL PLASTICITY; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION;

EID: 10044235292     PISSN: 13507540     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00019052-200412000-00013     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Calautti C, Baron JC. Functional neuroimaging studies of motor recovery after stroke in adults: a review. Stroke 2003; 34:1553-1566.
2. Ward NS, Brown MM, Thompson AJ, Frackowiak RS. Neural correlates of outcome after stroke: a cross-sectional fMRI study. Brain 2003; 126:1430-1448. By utilizing a hand-grip paradigm this study was able to include patients with incomplete recovery. Differences in motor activation patterns have then been characterized in terms of outcome.
3. Maier MA, Armand J, Kirkwood PA, et al. Differences in the corticospinal projection from primary motor cortex and supplementary motor area to macaque upper limb motoneurons: an anatomical and electrophysiological study. Cereb Cortex 2002; 12:281-296.
4. Ward NS, Brown MM, Thompson AJ, Frackowiak RS. The influence of time after stroke on brain activations during a motor task. Ann Neurol 2004; 55:829-834. This study suggested that secondary motor areas are available if required irrespective of time after stroke, but that visuomotor artentional networks are more readily engaged early after stroke.
5. Crafton KR, Mark AN, Cramer SC. Improved understanding of cortical injury by incorporating measures of functional anatomy. Brain 2003; 126:1650-1659. This study demonstrated that the volume of infarction within functionally relevant brain tissue can predict impairment more accurately than total infarct volume.
6. Luft AR, Waller S, Forrester L, et al. Lesion location alters brain activation in chronically impaired stroke survivors. Neuroimage 2004; 21:924-935.
7. Fridman EA, Hanakawa T, Chung M, et al. Reorganization of the human ipsilesional premotor cortex after stroke. Brain 2004; 127:747-758. This study demonstrated the functional relevance of ipsilesional premotor cortex in supporting motor performance after stroke. TMS to ipsilesional premotor cortex was able to disrupt a reaction time task in stroke patients but not controls.
8. Johansen-Berg H, Rushworth MF, Bogdanovic MD, et al. The role of ipsilateral premotor cortex in hand movement after stroke. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002; 99:14518-14523.
9. Johansen-Berg H, Dawes H, Guy C, et al. Correlation between motor improvements and altered fMRI activity after rehabilitative therapy. Brain 2002; 125:2731-2742.
10. Miyai I, Yagura H, Hatakenaka M, et al. Longitudinal optical imaging study for locomotor recovery after stroke. Stroke 2003; 34:2866-2870.
11. Werhahn KJ, Conforto AB, Kadom N, et al. Contribution of the ipsilateral motor cortex to recovery after chronic stroke. Ann Neurol 2003; 54:464-472. TMS to contralesional motor cortex does not disrupt motor behaviour in controls or stroke patients, thereby questioning its functional relevance in recovery.
12. Lee L, Siebner HR, Rowe JB, et al. Acute remapping within the motor system induced by low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Neurosci 2003; 23:5308-5318. Reorganization of the motor system is demonstrated in response to 1 Hz repetitive TMS to left M1. In particular, movement related activity in the premotor cortex of the non-stimulated hemisphere became more prominent.
13. Strens LH, Fogelson N, Shanahan P, et al. The ipsilateral human motor cortex can functionally compensate for acute contralateral motor cortex dysfunction. Curr Biol 2003; 13:1201-1205. This study demonstrated that ipsilateral M1 may compensate for acute disruption of contralateral M1 function by short bursts of 5 Hz repetitive TMS. Bilateral repetitive TMS, however, impairs a motor precision task further, suggesting that ipsilateral M1 had previously been compensatory.
14. Foltys H, Krings T, Meister IG, et al. Motor representation in patients rapidly recovering after stroke: a functional magnetic resonance imaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114:2404-2415. This study uses both fMRI and TMS to good effect in the same group of stroke patients.
15. Vandermeeren Y, Sebire G, Grandin CB, et al. Functional reorganization of brain in children affected with congenital hemiplegia: fMRI study. Neuroimage 2003; 20:289-301.
16. Verleger R, Adam S, Rose M, et al. Control of hand movements after striatocapsular stroke: high-resolution temporal analysis of the function of ipsilateral activation. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114:1468-1476. The high temporal resolution of electroencephalography is used to demonstrate that activity in the contralesional hemisphere commences after initiation of a motor task. Relatively low spatial resolution, however, cannot distinguish between primary motor cortex and premotor cortex.
17. Jang SH, Kim YH, Cho SH, et al. Cortical reorganization induced by task-oriented training in chronic hemiplegic stroke patients. Neuroreport 2003; 14:137-141.
18. Jang SH, Cho SH, Kim YH, et al. Cortical activation changes associated with motor recovery in patients with precentral knob infarct. Neuroreport 2004; 15:395-399.
19. Ward NS, Brown MM, Thompson AJ, Frackowiak RS. Neural correlates of motor recovery after stroke: a longitudinal fMRI study. Brain 2003; 126:2476-2496. This longitudinal study described the evolution of motor activation patterns after stroke, using a hand grip paradigm to ensure that patients were able to participate in the earliest phases of motor recovery.
20. Feydy A, Cartier R, Roby-Brami A, et al. Longitudinal study of motor recovery after stroke: recruitment and focusing of brain activation. Stroke 2002; 33:1610-1617.
21. Hikosaka O, Nakamura K, Sakai K, Nakahara H. Central mechanisms of motor skill learning. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2002; 12:217-222.
22. Buchkremer-Ratzmann I, August M, Hagemann G, Witte OW. Electrophysiological transcortical diaschisis after cortical photothrombosis in rat brain. Stroke 1996; 27:1105-1109.
23. Neumann-Haefelin T, Staiger JF, Redecker C, et al. Immunohistochemical evidence for dysregulation of the GABAergic system ipsilateral to photochemically induced cortical infarcts in rats. Neuroscience 1998; 87:871-879.
24. Cicinelli P, Pasqualetti P, Zaccagnini M, et al. Interhemispheric asymmetries of motor cortex excitability in the postacute stroke stage: a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Stroke 2003; 34:2653-2658.
25. Bütefisch CM, Netz J, Wessling M, et al. Remote changes in cortical excitability after stroke. Brain 2003; 126:470-481.
26. Shimizu T, Hosaki A, Hino T, et al. Motor cortical disinhibition in the unaffected hemisphere after unilateral cortical stroke. Brain 2002; 125:1896-1907.
27. Delvaux V, Alagona G, Gerard P, et al. Post-stroke reorganization of hand motor area: a 1-year prospective follow-up with focal transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114:1217-1225. This useful observational study detailed the longitudinal changes in a number of neurophysiological characteristics of both ipsilesional and contralesional motor cortices after stroke.
28. Murase N, Duque J, Mazzocchio R, Cohen LG. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann Neurol 2004; 55:400-409. This study demonstrated that contralesional M1 may impair motor performance of the affected hand in chronic stroke patients. This finding suggested that reduction of this effect may lead to functional improvement in similar patient populations.
29. Neuroimaging in stroke recovery: A position paper from the first international workshop on neuroimaging and stroke recovery. Cerebrovasc Dis 2004; 18:260-267. The authors assess the impact of functional imaging in helping to unravel the mechanisms of functional recovery after stroke. Discussion includes the future uses of functional imaging as well as the importance of experimental design.
30. Loubinoux I, Carel C, Pariente J, et al. Correlation between cerebral reorganization and motor recovery after subcortical infarcts. Neuroimage 2003; 20:2166-2180. Using a passive movement task the authors were able to study cerebral organization in the sensorimotor networks of patients unable to generate useful volitional movement.
31. Huang M, Davis LE, Aine C, et al. MEG response to median nerve stimulation correlates with recovery of sensory and motor function after stroke. Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 115:820-833.
32. Pavlides C, Miyashita E, Asanuma H. Projection from the sensory to the motor cortex is important in learning motor skills in the monkey. J Neurophysiol 1993; 70:733-741.
33. Gallien P, Aghulon C, Durufle A, et al. Magnetoencephalography in stroke: a 1-year follow-up study. Eur J Neurol 2003; 10:373-382.
34. Jang SH, Kim YH, Chang Y, et al. The predictive value of cortical activation by passive movement for motor recovery in stroke patients. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004; 22:59-63.
35. Kobayashi M, Hutchinson S, Theoret H, et al. Repetitive TMS of the motor cortex improves ipsilateral sequential simple finger movements. Neurology 2004; 62:91-98.
36. Bütefisch CM, Khurana V, Kopylev L, Cohen LG. Enhancing encoding of a motor memory in the primary motor cortex by cortical stimulation. J Neurophysiol 2004; 91:2110-2116. This study suggested that practice dependent encoding of a motor task can be enhanced by synchronous TMS.
37. Uy J, Ridding MC, Hillier S, et al. Does induction of plastic change in motor cortex improve leg function after stroke? Neurology 2003; 61:982-984. An interesting pilot study which used the technique of paired associative stimuli to manipulate cortical excitability as a therapeutic intervention. Clinical improvements were seen in those with greatest change in the neurophysiological markers of cortical excitability.
38. Stefan K, Kunesch E, Benecke R, et al. Mechanisms of enhancement of human motor cortex excitability induced by interventional paired associative stimulation. J Physiol 2002; 543:699-708.
39. McKay DR, Ridding MC, Thompson PD, Miles TS. Induction of persistent changes in the organisation of the human motor cortex. Exp Brain Res 2002; 143:342-349.
40. Brown JA, Lutsep H, Cramer SC, Weinand M. Motor cortex stimulation for enhancement of recovery after stroke: case report. Neurol Res 2003; 25:815-818. This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of epidural electrode placement in stroke patients, in order to manipulate ipsilesional motor cortex excitability.
41. Werhahn KJ, Mortensen J, Kaelin-Lang A, et al. Cortical excitability changes induced by deafferentation of the contralateral hemisphere. Brain 2002; 125:1402-1413.
42. Floel A, Nagorsen U, Werhahn KJ, et al. Influence of somatosensory input on motor function in patients with chronic stroke. Ann Neurol 2004; 56:206-212. Based on the predicted pattern of interhemispheric rivalry between ipsilesional and contralesional sensorimotor cortex in subcortical stroke patients, this study demonstrated expected improvement in a motor task by restricting sensory input to the unaffected hand.
43. Lackner E, Hummelsheim H. Motor-evoked potentials are facilitated during perceptual identification of hand position in healthy subjects and stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 2003; 17:648-655. This study demonstrated that manipulation of attention to a relevant cognitive modality during a motor task has an effect on motor cortex excitability in the normal and lesioned brain.
44. Conforto AB, Kaelin-Lang A, Cohen LG. Increase in hand muscle strength of stroke patients after somatosensory stimulation. Ann Neurol 2002; 51:122-125.
45. Stefan K, Wycislo M, Classen J. Modulation of associative human motor cortical plasticity by attention. J Neurophysiol 2004; 92:66-72. An example of the modulatory effect of cognitive manipulation on the capacity of the normal cortex to adapt to synchronous inputs.
46. Kim YH, Park JW, Ko MH, et al. Plastic changes of motor network after constraint-induced movement therapy. Yonsei Med J 2004; 45:241-246.
47. Carey JR, Anderson KM, Kimberley TJ, et al. fMRI analysis of ankle movement tracking training in subject with stroke. Exp Brain Res 2004; 154:281-290.
48. Kimberley TJ, Lewis SM, Auerbach EJ, et al. Electrical stimulation driving functional improvements and cortical changes in subjects with stroke. Exp Brain Res 2004; 154:450-460.
49. The Academy of Medical Sciences. Restoring neurological function: putting the neurosciences to work in neurorehabilitation. London: Academy of Medical Sciences; 2004. http://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/. [Accessed October 2004].