Kelly A Tennant1, Abigail L Kerr2, DeAnna L Adkins3, Nicole Donlan4, Nagheme Thomas5, Jeffrey A Kleim5, Theresa A Jones4. 1. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada tennantk@uvic.ca. 2. Illinois Wesleyan University, Bloomington, IL, USA. 3. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 4. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA. 5. School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of stroke in adulthood increases with advancing age, but there is little understanding of how poststroke treatment should be tailored by age. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine if age and task specificity of rehabilitative training affect behavioral improvement and motor cortical organization after stroke. METHODS: Young and aged mice were trained to proficiency on the Pasta Matrix Reaching Task prior to lesion induction in primary motor cortex with endothelin-1. After a short recovery period, mice received 9 weeks of rehabilitative training on either the previously learned task (Pasta Matrix Reaching), a different reaching task (Tray Reaching), or no training. To determine the extent of relearning, mice were tested once weekly on the Pasta Matrix Reaching Task. Mice then underwent intracortical microstimulation mapping to resolve the remaining forelimb movement representations in perilesion motor cortex. RESULTS: Although aged mice had significantly larger lesions compared with young mice, Pasta Matrix Reaching served as effective rehabilitative training for both age-groups. Young animals also showed improvement after Tray Reaching. Behavioral improvement in young mice was associated with an expansion of the rostral forelimb area ("premotor" cortex), but we failed to see reorganization in the aged brain, despite similar behavioral improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that reorganization of motor cortex may be limited by either aging or greater tissue damage, but the capacity to improve motor function via task-specific rehabilitative training continues to be well maintained in aged animals.
BACKGROUND: The incidence of stroke in adulthood increases with advancing age, but there is little understanding of how poststroke treatment should be tailored by age. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine if age and task specificity of rehabilitative training affect behavioral improvement and motor cortical organization after stroke. METHODS: Young and aged mice were trained to proficiency on the Pasta Matrix Reaching Task prior to lesion induction in primary motor cortex with endothelin-1. After a short recovery period, mice received 9 weeks of rehabilitative training on either the previously learned task (Pasta Matrix Reaching), a different reaching task (Tray Reaching), or no training. To determine the extent of relearning, mice were tested once weekly on the Pasta Matrix Reaching Task. Mice then underwent intracortical microstimulation mapping to resolve the remaining forelimb movement representations in perilesion motor cortex. RESULTS: Although aged mice had significantly larger lesions compared with young mice, Pasta Matrix Reaching served as effective rehabilitative training for both age-groups. Young animals also showed improvement after Tray Reaching. Behavioral improvement in young mice was associated with an expansion of the rostral forelimb area ("premotor" cortex), but we failed to see reorganization in the aged brain, despite similar behavioral improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that reorganization of motor cortex may be limited by either aging or greater tissue damage, but the capacity to improve motor function via task-specific rehabilitative training continues to be well maintained in aged animals.
Authors: Peter S Lum; Sara Mulroy; Richard L Amdur; Philip Requejo; Boris I Prilutsky; Alexander W Dromerick Journal: Top Stroke Rehabil Date: 2009 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.119
Authors: Kelly A Tennant; Deanna L Adkins; Nicole A Donlan; Aaron L Asay; Nagheme Thomas; Jeffrey A Kleim; Theresa A Jones Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2010-08-25 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Tara L Moore; Ronald J Killiany; Monica A Pessina; Mark B Moss; Seth P Finklestein; Douglas L Rosene Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2011-04-01 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Kelly A Tennant; DeAnna L Adkins; Matthew D Scalco; Nicole A Donlan; Aaron L Asay; Nagheme Thomas; Jeffrey A Kleim; Theresa A Jones Journal: Neurobiol Learn Mem Date: 2012-09-23 Impact factor: 2.877
Authors: Steven R Zeiler; Ellen M Gibson; Robert E Hoesch; Ming Y Li; Paul F Worley; Richard J O'Brien; John W Krakauer Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-01-15 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Monica A Maldonado; Rachel P Allred; Erik L Felthauser; Theresa A Jones Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2007-12-11 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Kate Pirog Revill; Marc W Haut; Samir R Belagaje; Fadi Nahab; Daniel Drake; Cathrin M Buetefisch Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Amber J O'Bryant; DeAnna L Adkins; Austen A Sitko; Hannah L Combs; Sarah K Nordquist; Theresa A Jones Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2014-12-19 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: DeAnna L Adkins; Lindsay Ferguson; Steven Lance; Aleksandr Pevtsov; Kevin McDonough; Justin Stamschror; Theresa A Jones; Dorothy A Kozlowski Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2015-03-11 Impact factor: 3.919