Literature DB >> 27277836

Normalization of network connectivity in hemispatial neglect recovery.

Lenny E Ramsey1, Joshua S Siegel1, Antonello Baldassarre2, Nicholas V Metcalf1, Kristina Zinn1, Gordon L Shulman1, Maurizio Corbetta1,3,4,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We recently reported that spatial and nonspatial attention deficits in stroke patients with hemispatial neglect are correlated at 2 weeks postonset with widespread alterations of interhemispheric and intrahemispheric functional connectivity (FC) measured with resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging across multiple brain networks. The mechanisms underlying neglect recovery are largely unknown. In this study, we test the hypothesis that recovery of hemispatial neglect correlates with a return of network connectivity toward a normal pattern, herein defined as "network normalization."
METHODS: We measured attention deficits with a neuropsychological battery and FC in a large cohort of stroke patients at, on average, 2 weeks (n = 99), 3 months (n = 77), and 12 months (n = 64) postonset. The relationship between behavioral improvement and changes in FC was analyzed both in terms of a priori regions and networks known to be abnormal subacutely and in a data-driven manner.
RESULTS: Attention deficit recovery was mostly complete by 3 months and was significantly correlated with a normalization of abnormal FC across many networks. Improvement of attention deficits, independent of initial severity, was correlated with improvements of previously depressed interhemispheric FC across attention, sensory, and motor networks, and a restoration of the normal anticorrelation between dorsal attention/motor regions and default-mode/frontoparietal regions, particularly in the damaged hemisphere.
INTERPRETATION: These results demonstrate that abnormal network connectivity in hemispatial neglect is behaviorally relevant. A return toward normal network interactions, and presumably optimal information processing, is therefore a systems-level mechanism that is associated with improvements of attention over time after focal injury. Ann Neurol 2016;80:127-141.
© 2016 American Neurological Association.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27277836      PMCID: PMC5682026          DOI: 10.1002/ana.24690

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Neurol        ISSN: 0364-5134            Impact factor:   10.422


  55 in total

1.  Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory.

Authors:  E Awh; J Jonides
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2001-03-01       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Individual variability in functional connectivity predicts performance of a perceptual task.

Authors:  Antonello Baldassarre; Christopher M Lewis; Giorgia Committeri; Abraham Z Snyder; Gian Luca Romani; Maurizio Corbetta
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Neural basis and recovery of spatial attention deficits in spatial neglect.

Authors:  Maurizio Corbetta; Michelle J Kincade; Chris Lewis; Abraham Z Snyder; Ayelet Sapir
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2005-10-23       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  A simple measure of neglect severity.

Authors:  Christopher Rorden; Hans-Otto Karnath
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 3.139

Review 5.  Spatial neglect and attention networks.

Authors:  Maurizio Corbetta; Gordon L Shulman
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 12.449

6.  Modulating cortical connectivity in stroke patients by rTMS assessed with fMRI and dynamic causal modeling.

Authors:  Christian Grefkes; Dennis A Nowak; Ling E Wang; Manuel Dafotakis; Simon B Eickhoff; Gereon R Fink
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-12-18       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Microstructural status of ipsilesional and contralesional corticospinal tract correlates with motor skill in chronic stroke patients.

Authors:  Judith D Schaechter; Zachary P Fricker; Katherine L Perdue; Karl G Helmer; Mark G Vangel; Douglas N Greve; Nikos Makris
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Frequency, risk factors, anatomy, and course of unilateral neglect in an acute stroke cohort.

Authors:  J M Ringman; J L Saver; R F Woolson; W R Clarke; H P Adams
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2004-08-10       Impact factor: 9.910

9.  Resting state network estimation in individual subjects.

Authors:  Eric C Leuthardt; Maurizio Corbetta; Carl D Hacker; Timothy O Laumann; Nicholas P Szrama; Antonello Baldassarre; Abraham Z Snyder
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-06-02       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  The anatomy of visual neglect.

Authors:  Dominic J Mort; Paresh Malhotra; Sabira K Mannan; Chris Rorden; Alidz Pambakian; Chris Kennard; Masud Husain
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2003-06-23       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  34 in total

1.  Brain networks' functional connectivity separates aphasic deficits in stroke.

Authors:  Antonello Baldassarre; Nicholas V Metcalf; Gordon L Shulman; Maurizio Corbetta
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 9.910

2.  Pathological structure of visuospatial neglect: A comprehensive multivariate analysis of spatial and non-spatial aspects.

Authors:  Yusaku Takamura; Shintaro Fujii; Satoko Ohmatsu; Shu Morioka; Noritaka Kawashima
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2021-03-16

Review 3.  Update on the Clinical Approach to Spatial Neglect.

Authors:  A M Barrett; K E Houston
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 5.081

4.  Using machine learning-based lesion behavior mapping to identify anatomical networks of cognitive dysfunction: Spatial neglect and attention.

Authors:  Daniel Wiesen; Christoph Sperber; Grigori Yourganov; Christopher Rorden; Hans-Otto Karnath
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 5.  Brain connectivity and neurological disorders after stroke.

Authors:  Antonello Baldassarre; Lenny E Ramsey; Joshua S Siegel; Gordon L Shulman; Maurizio Corbetta
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.710

6.  Structural Disconnections Explain Brain Network Dysfunction after Stroke.

Authors:  Joseph C Griffis; Nicholas V Metcalf; Maurizio Corbetta; Gordon L Shulman
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 9.423

7.  Reply: Defining a functional network homeostasis after stroke: EEG-based approach is complementary to functional MRI.

Authors:  Mohit H Adhikari; Gustavo Deco; Maurizio Corbetta
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 13.501

8.  Induced sensorimotor cortex plasticity remediates chronic treatment-resistant visual neglect.

Authors:  Jacinta O'Shea; Patrice Revol; Helena Cousijn; Jamie Near; Pierre Petitet; Sophie Jacquin-Courtois; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Gilles Rode; Yves Rossetti
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  Biomarkers of stroke recovery: Consensus-based core recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

Authors:  Lara A Boyd; Kathryn S Hayward; Nick S Ward; Cathy M Stinear; Charlotte Rosso; Rebecca J Fisher; Alexandre R Carter; Alex P Leff; David A Copland; Leeanne M Carey; Leonardo G Cohen; D Michele Basso; Jane M Maguire; Steven C Cramer
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.266

10.  Discrete Patterns of Cross-Hemispheric Functional Connectivity Underlie Impairments of Spatial Cognition after Stroke.

Authors:  Radek Ptak; Alexia Bourgeois; Silvia Cavelti; Naz Doganci; Armin Schnider; Giannina Rita Iannotti
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.