Neural function, injury, and stroke subtype predict treatment gains after stroke

Annals of Neurology

Volumn 77, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 132-145

  Quinlan, Erin Burke ^a   Dodakian, Lucy ^a   See, Jill ^a   McKenzie, Alison ^b   Le, Vu ^a   Wojnowicz, Mike ^c   Shahbaba, Babak ^c   Cramer, Steven C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PLACEBO;

ADULT; APTITUDE TEST; ARTICLE; BRAIN CORTEX; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN INJURY; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; COGNITION; CONNECTOME; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GRAY MATTER; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; KINESIOTHERAPY; LACUNAR STROKE; LASSO REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; MEDICAL HISTORY; MIDDLE AGED; MOOD; MOTOR CORTEX; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NERVOUS SYSTEM INJURY; NEUROIMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYRAMIDAL TRACT; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; ROBOTIC ASSISTED HAND THERAPY; ROBOTICS; STROKE PATIENT; TREATMENT DURATION; WHITE MATTER INJURY; AGED; BRAIN INJURIES; CLASSIFICATION; COGNITION DISORDERS; COMPLICATION; HAND STRENGTH; IMAGE PROCESSING; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MOOD DISORDERS; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROCEDURES; STROKE;

ADULT; AGED; BRAIN INJURIES; COGNITION DISORDERS; EXERCISE THERAPY; FEMALE; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOOD DISORDERS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; ROBOTICS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; STROKE;

EID: 84920767966     PISSN: 03645134     EISSN: 15318249     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ana.24309     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Bath PM, Lees KR, Schellinger PD, et al. Statistical analysis of the primary outcome in acute stroke trials. Stroke 2012;43:1171-1178.
2. Fisher M, Albers GW. Advanced imaging to extend the therapeutic time window of acute ischemic stroke. Ann Neurol 2013;73:4-9.
3. Farr TD, Wegener S. Use of magnetic resonance imaging to predict outcome after stroke: a review of experimental and clinical evidence. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2010;30:703-717.
4. Cramer SC. Issues in clinical trial methodology for brain repair after stroke. In: Cramer SC, Nudo RJ, eds. Brain repair after stroke. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010:173-182.
5. Cramer SC, Sur M, Dobkin BH, et al. Harnessing neuroplasticity for clinical applications. Brain 2011;134(pt 6):1591-1609.
6. Benowitz LI, Carmichael ST. Promoting axonal rewiring to improve outcome after stroke. Neurobiol Dis 2010;37:259-266.
7. Krupinski J, Slevin M. Emerging molecular targets for brain repair after stroke. Stroke Res Treat 2013;2013:473416.
8. Hermann DM, Chopp M. Promoting brain remodelling and plasticity for stroke recovery: therapeutic promise and potential pitfalls of clinical translation. Lancet Neurol 2012;11:369-380.
9. Friel K, Nudo R. Recovery of motor function after focal cortical injury in primates: compensatory movement patterns used during rehabilitative training. Somatosens Mot Res 1998;15:173-189.
10. Irle E. An analysis of the correlation of lesion size, localization and behavioral effects in 283 published studies of cortical and subcortical lesions in old-world monkeys. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1990; 15:181-213.
11. Biernaskie J, Szymanska A, Windle V, Corbett D. Bi-hemispheric contribution to functional motor recovery of the affected forelimb following focal ischemic brain injury in rats. Eur J Neurosci 2005;21:989-999.
12. Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008;51:S225-S239.
13. Adkins DL, Hsu JE, Jones TA. Motor cortical stimulation promotes synaptic plasticity and behavioral improvements following sensorimotor cortex lesions. Exp Neurol 2008;212:14-28.
14. Maldonado MA, Allred RP, Felthauser EL, Jones TA. Motor skill training, but not voluntary exercise, improves skilled reaching after unilateral ischemic lesions of the sensorimotor cortex in rats. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008;22:250-261.
15. Kerr AL, Cheng SY, Jones TA. Experience-dependent neural plasticity in the adult damaged brain. J Commun Disord 2011;44:538-548.
16. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Smale PR, et al. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007;130(pt 1):170-180.
17. Lindenberg R, Zhu LL, Ruber T, Schlaug G. Predicting functional motor potential in chronic stroke patients using diffusion tensor imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 2012;33:1040-1051.
18. Riley JD, Le V, Der-Yeghiaian L, et al. Anatomy of stroke injury predicts gains from therapy. Stroke 2011;42:421-426.
19. Nouri S, Cramer SC. Anatomy and physiology predict response to motor cortex stimulation after stroke. Neurology 2011;77:1076-1083.
20. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Petoe M, et al. The PREP algorithm predicts potential for upper limb recovery after stroke. Brain 2012;135(pt 8):2527-2535.
21. Dong Y, Dobkin BH, Cen SY, et al. Motor cortex activation during treatment may predict therapeutic gains in paretic hand function after stroke. Stroke 2006;37:1552-1555.
22. Milot MH, Spencer SJ, Chan V, et al. Corticospinal excitability as a predictor of functional gains at the affected upper limb following robotic training in chronic stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2014;28:819-827.
23. Cramer SC, Parrish TB, Levy RM, et al. Predicting functional gains in a stroke trial. Stroke 2007;38:2108-2114.
24. Laible M, Grieshammer S, Seidel G, et al. Association of activity changes in the primary sensory cortex with successful motor rehabilitation of the hand following stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012;26:881-888.
25. Sergi F, Krebs HI, Groissier B, et al. Predicting efficacy of robot-aided rehabilitation in chronic stroke patients using an MRI-compatible robotic device. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2011;2011:7470-7473.
26. Varkuti B, Guan C, Pan Y, et al. Resting state changes in functional connectivity correlate with movement recovery for BCI and robot-assisted upper-extremity training after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2013;27:53-62.
27. Graham JE, Ripsin CM, Deutsch A, et al. Relationship between diabetes codes that affect Medicare reimbursement (tier comorbidities) and outcomes in stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009;90:1110-1116.
28. Dam M, Tonin P, Casson S, et al. The effects of long-term rehabilitation therapy on poststroke hemiplegic patients. Stroke 1993;24:1186-1191.
29. Kononen M, Tarkka IM, Niskanen E, et al. Functional MRI and motor behavioral changes obtained with constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke. Eur J Neurol 2012;19:578-586.
30. McCarron MO, Muir KW, Nicoll JA, et al. Prospective study of apolipoprotein E genotype and functional outcome following ischemic stroke. Arch Neurol 2000;57:1480-1484.
31. Cramer SC, Procaccio V. Correlation between genetic polymorphisms and stroke recovery: analysis of the GAIN Americas and GAIN International Studies. Eur J Neurol 2012;19:718-724.
32. Pearson-Fuhrhop KM, Burke E, Cramer SC. The influence of genetic factors on brain plasticity and recovery after neural injury. Curr Opin Neurol 2012;25:682-688.
33. Kernan WN, Ovbiagele B, Black HR, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2014;45:2160-2236.
34. Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2013;44:870-947.
35. Seitz RJ, Donnan GA. Role of neuroimaging in promoting longterm recovery from ischemic stroke. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;32:756-772.
36. Burke E, Cramer SC. Biomarkers and predictors of restorative therapy effects after stroke. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2013;13:329.
37. Stinear CM, Ward NS. How useful is imaging in predicting outcomes in stroke rehabilitation? Int J Stroke 2013;8:33-37.
38. Burke E, Dodakian L, See J, et al. A multimodal approach to understanding motor impairment and disability after stroke. J Neurol 2014;261:1178-1186.
39. Pullicino P, Nelson RF, Kendall BE, Marshall J. Small deep infarcts diagnosed on computed tomography. Neurology 1980;30:1090-1096.
40. Sprigg N, Gray LJ, Bath PM, et al. Early recovery and functional outcome are related with causal stroke subtype: data from the tinzaparin in acute ischemic stroke trial. J Stroke Cerebrovasc 2007;16:180-184.
41. Lavados PM, Sacks C, Prina L, et al. Incidence, case-fatality rate, and prognosis of ischaemic stroke subtypes in a predominantly Hispanic-Mestizo population in Iquique, Chile (PISCIS project): a community-based incidence study. Lancet Neurol 2007;6:140-148.
42. Mustanoja S, Meretoja A, Putaala J, et al. Outcome by stroke etiology in patients receiving thrombolytic treatment: descriptive subtype analysis. Stroke 2011;42:102-106.
43. Uchino K, Billheimer D, Cramer S. Entry criteria and baseline characteristics predict outcome in acute stroke trials. Stroke 2001;32:909-916.
44. Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Weber M, Gefeller O, et al. Epidemiology of ischemic stroke subtypes according to TOAST criteria: incidence, recurrence, and long-term survival in ischemic stroke subtypes: a population-based study. Stroke 2001;32:2735-2740.
45. Landi G, D'Angelo A, Boccardi E, et al. Venous thromboembolism in acute stroke: prognostic importance of hypercoagulability. Arch Neurol 1992;49:279-283.
46. Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Twisk J. Impact of time on improvement of outcome after stroke. Stroke 2006;37:2348-2353.
47. Nakayama H, Jorgensen H, Raaschou H, Olsen T. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:394-398.
48. Takahashi CD, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, et al. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain 2008;131(pt 2):425-437.
49. Zhu LL, Lindenberg R, Alexander MP, Schlaug G. Lesion load of the corticospinal tract predicts motor impairment in chronic stroke. Stroke 2010;41:910-915.
50. Park CH, Kou N, Boudrias MH, et al. Assessing a standardised approach to measuring corticospinal integrity after stroke with DTI. Neuroimage Clin 2013;2:521-533.
51. Whitfield-Gabrieli S, Nieto-Castanon A. Conn: a functional connectivity toolbox for correlated and anticorrelated brain networks. Brain Connect 2012;2:125-141.
52. Nelles G, Cramer S, Schaechter J, et al. Quantitative assessment of mirror movements after stroke. Stroke 1998;29:1182-1187.
53. Ward N, Brown M, Thompson A, Frackowiak R. Neural correlates of outcome after stroke: a cross-sectional fMRI study. Brain 2003;126(pt 6):1430-1448.
54. Fisher CM. Lacunar strokes and infarcts: a review. Neurology 1982;32:871-876.
55. Kotila M, Waltimo O, Niemi M, et al. The profile of recovery from stroke and factors influencing outcome. Stroke 1984;15:1039-1044.
56. Macciocchi S, Diamond P, Alves W, Mertz T. Ischemic stroke: relation of age, lesion location, and initial neurologic deficit to functional outcome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79:1255-1257.
57. Niskakangas T, Ohman J, Niemela M, et al. Association of apolipoprotein E polymorphism with outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a preliminary study. Stroke 2001;32:1181-1184.
58. Siironen J, Juvela S, Kanarek K, et al. The Met allele of the BDNF Val66Met polymorphism predicts poor outcome among survivors of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke 2007;38:2858-2860.
59. van de Weg FB, Kuik DJ, Lankhorst GJ. Post-stroke depression and functional outcome: a cohort study investigating the influence of depression on functional recovery from stroke. Clin Rehabil 1999;13:268-272.
60. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The elements of statistical learning. New York, NY: Springer, 2001.
61. Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 1996;58:267-288.
62. Simon N, Tibshirani R. Standardization and the group lasso penalty. Stat Sinica 2012;22:983-1001.
63. Carter AR, Patel KR, Astafiev SV, et al. Upstream dysfunction of somatomotor functional connectivity after corticospinal damage in stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012;26:7-19.
64. Page SJ, Fulk GD, Boyne P. Clinically important differences for the upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale in people with minimal to moderate impairment due to chronic stroke. Phys Ther 2012;92:791-798.
65. Hakkennes S, Hill KD, Brock K, et al. Selection for inpatient rehabilitation after severe stroke: what factors influence rehabilitation assessor decision-making? J Rehabil Med 2013;45:24-31.
66. Binkofski F, Seitz R, Arnold S, et al. Thalamic metabolism and corticospinal tract integrity determine motor recovery in stroke. Ann Neurol 1996;39:460-470.
67. Ameli M, Grefkes C, Kemper F, et al. Differential effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over ipsilesional primary motor cortex in cortical and subcortical middle cerebral artery stroke. Ann Neurol 2009;66:298-309.
68. Young W. Spinal cord regeneration. Science 1996;273:451.
69. Crafton K, Mark A, Cramer S. Improved understanding of cortical injury by incorporating measures of functional anatomy. Brain 2003;126(pt 7):1650-1659.
70. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Smale PR, et al. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007;130(pt 1):170-180.
71. Trochim WM, Cappelleri JC. Cutoff assignment strategies for enhancing randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1992;13:190-212.
72. Carter AR, Astafiev SV, Lang CE, et al. Resting interhemispheric functional magnetic resonance imaging connectivity predicts performance after stroke. Ann Neurol 2010;67:365-375.
73. Urbin MA, Hong X, Lang CE, Carter AR. Resting-state functional connectivity and its association with multiple domains of upper-extremity function in chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2014;28:761-769.
74. van Meer MP, van der Marel K, Wang K, et al. Recovery of sensorimotor function after experimental stroke correlates with restoration of resting-state interhemispheric functional connectivity. J Neurosci 2010;30:3964-3972.
75. Gerloff C, Bushara K, Sailer A, et al. Multimodal imaging of brain reorganization in motor areas of the contralesional hemisphere of well recovered patients after capsular stroke. Brain 2006;129(pt 3):791-808.
76. Lotze M, Markert J, Sauseng P, et al. The role of multiple contralesional motor areas for complex hand movements after internal capsular lesion. J Neurosci 2006;26:6096-6102.
77. Takechi U, Matsunaga K, Nakanishi R, et al. Longitudinal changes of motor cortical excitability and transcallosal inhibition after subcortical stroke. Clin Neurophysiol 2014;125:2055-2069.
78. 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.
79. Swayne OB, Rothwell JC, Ward NS, Greenwood RJ. Stages of motor output reorganization after hemispheric stroke suggested by longitudinal studies of cortical physiology. Cereb Cortex 2008;18:1909-1922.
80. Hummel FC, Steven B, Hoppe J, et al. Deficient intracortical inhibition (SICI) during movement preparation after chronic stroke. Neurology 2009;72:1766-1772.
81. Murase N, Duque J, Mazzocchio R, Cohen L. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann Neurol 2004;55:400-409.
82. Takeuchi N, Chuma T, Matsuo Y, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of contralesional primary motor cortex improves hand function after stroke. Stroke 2005;36:2681-2686.
83. Grefkes C, Nowak DA, Wang LE, et al. Modulating cortical connectivity in stroke patients by rTMS assessed with fMRI and dynamic causal modeling. Neuroimage 2010;50:233-242.
84. Rowe JB. Connectivity analysis is essential to understand neurological disorders. Front Syst Neurosci 2010;4.
85. Sharma N, Baron JC, Rowe JB. Motor imagery after stroke: relating outcome to motor network connectivity. Ann Neurol 2009;66:604-616.
86. Grefkes C, Fink GR. Reorganization of cerebral networks after stroke: new insights from neuroimaging with connectivity approaches. Brain 2011;134(pt 5):1264-1276.
87. Carter AR, Shulman GL, Corbetta M. Why use a connectivity-based approach to study stroke and recovery of function? Neuroimage 2012;62:2271-2280.
88. Jackson C, Sudlow C. Are lacunar strokes really different? A systematic review of differences in risk factor profiles between lacunar and nonlacunar infarcts. Stroke 2005;36:891-901.
89. Jackson C, Sudlow C. Comparing risks of death and recurrent vascular events between lacunar and non-lacunar infarction. Brain 2005;128(pt 11):2507-2517.
90. Landi G, Cella E, Boccardi E, Musicco M. Lacunar versus non-lacunar infarcts: pathogenetic and prognostic differences. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992;55:441-445.
91. Luft A, Waller S, Forrester L, et al. Lesion location alters brain activation in chronically impaired stroke survivors. Neuroimage 2004;21:924-935.
92. Loubinoux I, Dechaumont-Palacin S, Castel-Lacanal E, et al. Prognostic value of FMRI in recovery of hand function in subcortical stroke patients. Cereb Cortex 2007;17:2980-2987.
93. Renner CI, Schubert M, Jahn M, Hummelsheim H. Intracortical excitability after repetitive hand movements is differentially affected in cortical versus subcortical strokes. J Clin Neurophysiol 2009;26:348-357.
94. Fritsch B, Reis J, Martinowich K, et al. Direct current stimulation promotes BDNF-dependent synaptic plasticity: potential implications for motor learning. Neuron 2010;66:198-204.
95. McHughen SA, Rodriguez PF, Kleim JA, et al. BDNF val66met polymorphism influences motor system function in the human brain. Cereb Cortex 2010;20:1254-1262.
96. Moore AB, Bondi MW, Salmon DP, Murphy C. Eyeblink classical conditioning to auditory and olfactory stimuli: performance among older adults with and without the apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 allele. Neuropsychology 2005;19:437-445.
97. Bookheimer S, Strojwas M, Cohen M, et al. Patterns of brain activation in people at risk for Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med 2000;343:450-456.
98. Ostwald SK, Swank PR, Khan MM. Predictors of functional independence and stress level of stroke survivors at discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2008;23:371-377.
99. Edmondson D, Richardson S, Fausett JK, et al. Prevalence of PTSD in survivors of stroke and transient ischemic attack: a metaanalytic review. PLoS One 2013;8:e66435.
100. Pearson-Fuhrhop KM, Minton B, Acevedo D, et al. Genetic variation in the human brain dopamine system influences motor learning and its modulation by L-dopa. PloS One 2013;8:e61197.
101. Han B, Haley WE. Family caregiving for patients with stroke. Review and analysis. Stroke 1999;30:1478-1485.
102. Cramer SC, Fitzpatrick C, Warren M, et al. The beta-hCG+erythropoietin in acute stroke (BETAS) study: a 3-center, single-dose, open-label, noncontrolled, phase IIa safety trial. Stroke 2010;41:927-931.