Literature DB >> 12881665

Analysis of recovery processes after stroke by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Hank T Hendricks1, Jaco W Pasman, Johannes L Merx, Jacques van Limbeek, Machiel J Zwarts.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to use motor evoked potentials (MEPs) to analyze the integrity of fast corticospinal functions as the neurophysiologic basis for motor recovery in stroke patients. This was a cohort study including 44 acute stroke patients with paralysis of the upper or the lower extremity. Motor evoked potentials of the abductor digiti minimi, the biceps brachii, the vastus medialis, and the tibialis anterior were performed within 10 days (mean, 6.9 days; range, 3 to 10 days) and 40 days (mean, 27.8 days; range, 14 to 40 days) after stroke onset. A separate score was defined for proximal and distal motor functions of the upper and lower extremity within the original Fugl-Meyer motor assessment. Motor performance was evaluated simultaneously with the MEP assessments and 26 weeks after stroke. For all the muscles in which a response was present during the first investigation, obvious recovery of the fast corticospinal functions occurred. For the abductor digiti minimi amplitude ratio and the vastus medialis MEP amplitude the differences between the two investigations were significant. An MEP response could be elicited in more cases at the second than on the first MEP assessment. A present MEP response during the first registration indicated nearly always subsequent motor recovery, both for proximal and distal motor functions of the upper and lower extremity. However, motor recovery was also observed in some patients for whom no MEP response could be elicited. Regression analysis showed significant relationships between the abductor digiti minimi (P = 0.020/0.004 [t1/t2])and biceps brachii (P = 0.020/0.004 [t1/t2]) MEP amplitude parameters and the 26-week hand and arm motor scores. No relationship existed between the tibialis anterior and the vastus medialis MEP parameters and the leg motor scores. Motor recovery manifests neurophysiologically often as the recovery of fast corticospinal functions. In many cases, assessment by MEPs is more sensitive than clinical examination to detect residual corticospinal functions, which forms the pathophysiologic basis for the predictive value of MEPs for motor recovery after stroke.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12881665     DOI: 10.1097/00004691-200305000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0736-0258            Impact factor:   2.177


  14 in total

1.  Training-induced modifications of corticospinal reactivity in severely affected stroke survivors.

Authors:  Ruth N Barker; Sandra G Brauer; Benjamin K Barry; Toby J Gill; Richard G Carson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Efficient neuroplasticity induction in chronic stroke patients by an associative brain-computer interface.

Authors:  Natalie Mrachacz-Kersting; Ning Jiang; Andrew James Thomas Stevenson; Imran Khan Niazi; Vladimir Kostic; Aleksandra Pavlovic; Sasa Radovanovic; Milica Djuric-Jovicic; Federica Agosta; Kim Dremstrup; Dario Farina
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Impairment-oriented training and adaptive motor cortex reorganisation after stroke: a fTMS study.

Authors:  T Platz; S van Kaick; L Möller; S Freund; T Winter; I-H Kim
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2005-06-24       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Differential Poststroke Motor Recovery in an Arm Versus Hand Muscle in the Absence of Motor Evoked Potentials.

Authors:  Heidi M Schambra; Jing Xu; Meret Branscheidt; Martin Lindquist; Jasim Uddin; Levke Steiner; Benjamin Hertler; Nathan Kim; Jessica Berard; Michelle D Harran; Juan C Cortes; Tomoko Kitago; Andreas Luft; John W Krakauer; Pablo A Celnik
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 3.919

5.  Prediction of motor recovery using initial impairment and fMRI 48 h poststroke.

Authors:  Eric Zarahn; Leeor Alon; Sophia L Ryan; Ronald M Lazar; Magnus-Sebastian Vry; Cornelius Weiller; Randolph S Marshall; John W Krakauer
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2011-04-28       Impact factor: 5.357

6.  Prediction of Motor Function Recovery after Subcortical Stroke: Case Series of Activation PET and TMS Studies.

Authors:  Se Hee Jung; Yu Kyeong Kim; Sang Eum Kim; Nam-Jong Paik
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2012-08-27

Review 7.  Spinal plasticity in robot-mediated therapy for the lower limbs.

Authors:  Andrew Jt Stevenson; Natalie Mrachacz-Kersting; Edwin van Asseldonk; Duncan L Turner; Erika G Spaich
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 4.262

8.  Recovery of a degenerated corticospinal tract after injury in a patient with intracerebral hemorrhage: confirmed by diffusion tensor tractography imaging.

Authors:  You Sung Seo; Sung Ho Jang
Journal:  Neural Regen Res       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 5.135

9.  Evaluation of the motor cortical excitability changes after ischemic stroke.

Authors:  D K Prashantha; S J Sriranjini; T N Sathyaprabha; D Nagaraja; Pramod Kr Pal
Journal:  Ann Indian Acad Neurol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.383

Review 10.  A Review of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Multimodal Neuroimaging to Characterize Post-Stroke Neuroplasticity.

Authors:  Angela M Auriat; Jason L Neva; Sue Peters; Jennifer K Ferris; Lara A Boyd
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.