| Literature DB >> 27840742 |
Zhiwei Guo1, Yu Jin1, Haitao Peng1, Guoqiang Xing2, Xiang Liao1, Yunfeng Wang3, Huaping Chen1, Bin He1, Morgan A McClure1, Qiwen Mu4.
Abstract
Purpose. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of high frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) on stroke patients with motor dysfunction and to investigate the underlying neural mechanism. Methods. Fifteen stroke patients were assigned to the rTMS treatment (RT) group and conventional treatment (CT) group. Patients in the RT received 10 Hz rTMS stimulation on the ipsilesional primary motor cortex for 10 days plus conventional treatment of CT, which consisted of acupuncture and antiplatelet aggregation medication. Difference in fractional anisotropy (FA) between pretreatment and posttreatment and between two groups was determined. Correlations between FA values and neurological assessments were also calculated. Results. Both groups significantly improved the neurological function after treatment. rTMS-treated patients showed better improvement in Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) score and increased FA value in motor-related white matter and gray matter cortices compared with CT-treated patients and pretreatment status. Besides, the increased FA value in the ipsilesional posterior limb of the internal capsule in RT group was significantly correlated with the improved FMA score. Significance. HF-rTMS could be a supplement therapy to CT in improving motor recovery in patients with stroke. And this benefit effect may be achieved through modulating the ipsilesional corticospinal tracts and motor-related gray matter cortices.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27840742 PMCID: PMC5093297 DOI: 10.1155/2016/6238575
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neural Plast ISSN: 1687-5443 Impact factor: 3.599
Clinical data of included stroke patients.
| Group | Number | Age (years) | Duration (days) | Gender | Lesion location | NIHSS | FM | BI | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | ||||||
| RT | 1 | 72 | 5 | F | L_IC, BG | 8 | 5 | 10 | 42 | 50 | 60 |
| 2 | 63 | 5 | M | L_IC, BG | 6 | 4 | 13 | 34 | 60 | 70 | |
| 3 | 79 | 3 | M | L_IC, BG | 10 | 6 | 38 | 69 | 35 | 55 | |
| 4 | 64 | 6 | F | L_IC, BG | 11 | 3 | 77 | 89 | 25 | 70 | |
| 5 | 64 | 6 | F | L_IC, BG | 11 | 9 | 67 | 77 | 25 | 30 | |
| 6 | 74 | 3 | F | L_IC, BG | 6 | 3 | 32 | 60 | 65 | 80 | |
| 7 | 58 | 4 | M | L_IC, BG | 9 | 5 | 22 | 51 | 25 | 45 | |
| 67.71 ± 7.4 | 4.57 ± 1.27 | 8.71 ± 2.14 | 5.00 ± 2.08 | 37.00 ± 26.00 | 60.29 ± 19.54 | 40.71 ± 17.42 | 58.57 ± 17.00 | ||||
|
| |||||||||||
| CT | 8 | 56 | 4 | F | L_IC | 10 | 8 | 20 | 22 | 25 | 30 |
| 9 | 76 | 3 | M | L_IC, BG, CR | 5 | 3 | 60 | 64 | 50 | 65 | |
| 10 | 53 | 6 | F | L_IC, BG | 9 | 7 | 14 | 35 | 40 | 55 | |
| 11 | 75 | 7 | M | L_IC, BG | 10 | 7 | 40 | 41 | 25 | 50 | |
| 12 | 61 | 5 | F | L_IC, BG | 9 | 6 | 22 | 27 | 30 | 40 | |
| 13 | 67 | 5 | F | L_IC, BG, CR | 7 | 3 | 63 | 69 | 80 | 90 | |
| 14 | 77 | 4 | M | L_IC, BG, CR | 11 | 5 | 11 | 18 | 20 | 30 | |
| 15 | 68 | 6 | M | L_IC, BG | 5 | 3 | 20 | 24 | 60 | 70 | |
| 66.63 ± 9.24 | 5.00 ± 1.30 | 8.25 ± 2.32 | 5.25 ± 2.05 | 31.25 ± 20.56 | 37.5 ± 19.37 | 41.25 ± 20.83 | 53.75 ± 20.83 | ||||
BG: basal ganglia; BI: Barthel Index; CT: conventional treatment; CR: corona radiate; FM: Fugl-Meyer Assessment; L_IC: left internal capsule; NIHSS: National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; RT: repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment; ∗ represents the significant difference between preclinical and postclinical scores (p < 0.05); △ represents the significant difference between the clinical scores of RT and CT groups.
Figure 1Individual diffusion weighted images in the axial view. The panel shows the slice with maximum infarct volume. Each subject is coded by the same serial number as the first row in Table 1.
Figure 2Comparison of FA maps between pre- and post-rTMS treatment for stroke patients in RT group. The FA results of one-sample t-test for stroke patients of pre- (a) and post-rTMS treatment (b). (c) Significantly changed brain areas are superimposed on the che2bet hemisphere of the Montreal Neurological Institute template brain in the three-view drawing (p < 0.05). The warm and cold tones separately indicate the increased and decreased FA value after rTMS treatment. (d) Bars represent the mean FA values. Vertical bars indicate estimated standard errors. Compared with the pre-rTMS treatment, the mean FA showed a significant increase after rTMS treatment in bilateral posterior limb of internal capsule (PLIC), left precentral gyrus (PG), right supplementary motor area (SMA), right middle frontal gyrus (MFG), and right corona radiate (CR).
Brain regions with significant clusters and peak voxel coordinates showing FA difference between pre- and post-rTMS treatment.
| Brain region | MNI coordinates ( |
| Voxel number |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Supp_motor_area_R | 7, −23, 60 | 4.89 | 77 |
| Frontal_mid_R | 36, 10, 51 | 3.18 | 48 |
| Precentral_L | −38, −2, 48 | 4.67 | 55 |
| Precentral_R | 27, −20, 54 | 4.22 | 73 |
| Thalamus_L | −23, −23, 6 | 7.56 | 39 |
| Temporal_inf_L | −59, −20, −30 | 6.89 | 31 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Precuneus_R | 5, −68, 53 | −4.74 | 32 |
| Parietal_sup_R | 27, −49, 51 | −5.58 | 54 |
| Angular_L | −44, −61, 48 | −2.84 | 28 |
MNI: Montreal Neurological Institute; L: left; R: right.
Figure 3Comparison of FA maps between patients of RT and CT groups after treatment. The FA results of one-sample t-test for stroke patients of post-CT (a) and post-rTMS treatment (b). (c) Significantly changed brain areas are superimposed on the che2bet hemisphere of the Montreal Neurological Institute template brain in the three-view drawing (p < 0.05). The warm and cold tones separately indicate the increased and decreased FA value of RT. (d) Bars represent the mean FA values. Vertical bars indicate estimated standard errors. Compared with the CT, the mean FA value showed a significant increase after rTMS treatment in bilateral posterior limb of internal capsule (PLIC), primary motor area (M1), and supplementary motor area (SMA) in RT.
Brain regions with significant clusters and peak voxel coordinates showing FA difference between rTMS group and control group.
| Brain region | MNI coordinates ( |
| Voxel number |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Supp_motor_area_L | 0, −1, 61 | 7.91 | 294 |
| Precentral_L | −44, −13, 60 | 3.63 | 75 |
| Precentral_R | 36, −23, 58 | 3.56 | 51 |
| Postcentral_L | −48, −26, 54 | 2.78 | 59 |
| Paracentral_lobule_L | −2, −31, 60 | 4.13 | 162 |
| Precuneus_L | −2, −47, 60 | 3.9 | 372 |
| Frontal_inf_tri_R | 49, 32, 7 | 4.13 | 58 |
| Thalamus_L | −23, −20, 6 | 2.68 | 51 |
| Insula_R | 45, 6, 9 | 2.96 | 46 |
| Frontal_sup_medial_R | 2, 59, 3 | 3.63 | 286 |
| Temporal_mid_R | 65, −36, 3 | 3.56 | 76 |
| Occipital_sup_R | 11, −96, 4 | 2.61 | 42 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Frontal_mid_R | 29, 53, 3 | −4.23 | 122 |
| Caudate_L | −13, 17, 10 | −2.39 | 58 |
| Frontal_sup_L | −14, 67, 2 | −2.76 | 50 |
| Frontal_mid_L | −30, 10, 51 | −3.1 | 29 |
MNI: Montreal Neurological Institute; L: left; R: right; RT: repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment; CT: conventional treatment.
Figure 4Relationship between changes of FA value in the ipsilesional posterior limb of internal capsule and changes of FMA score after rTMS treatment in the RT group (correlation coefficient r = 0.78, p = 0.039).