| Literature DB >> 29525809 |
Yayuan Liu1, Li Chen1, Jinseng Zeng2, Wenmei Li3, Sudan Zeng4, Bin Ye4, Zhijian Liang4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to investigate the reorganization in ipsilesional and contralesional thalamic radiation fibers after unilateral focal thalamic stroke in sensory disturbance patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS We recruited 12 patients with acute unilateral thalamic infarction and sensory disturbance and 12 healthy age- and sex-matched controls. All patients underwent diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and were assessed with National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS), Barthel index (BI), and paragraph 8 of NIHSS (NIHSS8) at 1 week (W1), 4 weeks (W4), 3 months (M3), and 6 months (M6) after thalamic infraction. The relationship between FA changes and the clinical scores changes were then examined. RESULTS NIHSS and NIHSS8 scores decreased while BI scores increased gradually from W1 to M6 in patients, but not in controls. FA values of the patients gradually increased in ipsilesional and contralesional thalamic radiation fibers from W1 to M6. In addition, the FA values in patients were significantly higher at M3 and M6 compared to W1. No significant changes were observed in the controls. Regarding the relationship between FA changes and the clinical scores changes, the FA increases were negatively correlated with NIHSS and NIHSS8 decrease while FA increases were positively correlated with BI increases. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate that reorganization occurred after unilateral focal thalamic infarct not only in ipsilesional, but also in contralesional thalamic radiation fibers in patients with sensory disturbance. In addition, the results suggested that the reorganization can support and promote stroke restoration.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29525809 PMCID: PMC5859668 DOI: 10.12659/msm.909071
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1Definition of regions of interest (ROIs) were defined a 4-voxel circle on ADC images (b=0). For the patients’ contralesional side (left side of images A–C) and control group (images D–F), ROIs were placed along the thalamic radiata fiber pathway in both left and right side at 3 positions: thalamus, corona radiata, and semiovale. For the patients, the ROIs in the ipsilesional side (right side of images A–C) were carefully placed to avoid the ischemic lesion and the thalamic fibers connecting to the lesion. There was no abnormal signal outside the ischemic lesion in patient images or in control subject images.
General patient information.
| No. | Gender | Age (years) | Risk Factors | Lesion site | Major symptoms |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M | 53 | Diabetes, smoking | Left thalamus | Right limbs sensory disturbance without weakness |
| 2 | M | 57 | Hyperlipidemia | Left thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory disturbance with limbs minor weakness |
| 3 | F | 50 | Hypertension | Right thalamus | Left limbs sensory disturbance with minor weakness |
| 4 | M | 48 | Hypertension, Smoking | Right thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory disturbance with right limbs minor weakness |
| 5 | M | 38 | Hypertension, Drinking | Left thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory disturbance without weakness |
| 6 | M | 43 | Hypertension, Diabetes | Left thalamus | Right limbs sensory loss without weakness |
| 7 | F | 45 | Hyperlipidemia | Left thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory disturbance without weakness |
| 8 | M | 44 | Hyperlipidemia,Smoking | Right thalamus | Left limbs sensory disturbance without weakness |
| 9 | M | 60 | Hyperlipidemia,High homocysteine | Left thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory disturbance with right limbs minor weakness |
| 10 | M | 46 | Hyperlipidemia, Smoking | Right thalamus | Left and limbs sensory disturbance without weakness |
| 11 | M | 62 | High homocysteine | Left thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory loss with right limbs minor weakness |
| 12 | F | 58 | Hypertension, Diabetes | Left thalamus | Right face and limbs sensory loss with right limbs minor weakness |
M6 – six months; M – Male; F – female.
Figure 2Representative FA pseudo-color pictures from a patient at W1, W4, M3, and M6 time points. Images A–C show the thalamus, corona radiata, and semiovale axial level, respectively. Images A1–A4, B1–B4, and C1–C4 were derived from W1 to M6. There was no abnormal signal outside the ischemic lesion in patient images or in control subject images.
FA values of thalamic radiation fibers at each time point (n=12).
| Regions located in corona radiata pathway | W1 | W4 | M3 | M6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients ipsilesinal side | ||||
| Thalamus | 0.42±0.02 | 0.43±0.08 | 0.46±0.07 | 0.49±0.06 |
| Corona radiata | 0.49±0.05 | 0.50±0.12 | 0.54±0.09 | 0.58±0.07 |
| Semiovale | 0.36±0.07 | 0.36±0.09 | 0.39±0.10 | 0.0.42±0.08 |
| Patients contralesional side | ||||
| Thalamus | 0.42±0.03 | 0.43±0.05 | 0.45±0.06 | 0.48±0.05 |
| Corona radiata | 0.50±0.06 | 0.51±0.11 | 0.53±0.08 | 0.57±0.05 |
| Semiovale | 0.35±0.06 | 0.36±0.06 | 0.38±0.07 | 0.41±0.06 |
| Controls | ||||
| Thalamus | 0.42±0.04 | 0.42±0.07 | 0.42±0.09 | 0.43±0.10 |
| Corona radiata | 0.49±0.03 | 0.50±0.09 | 0.50±0.06 | 0.49±0.05 |
| Semiovale | 0.35±0.04 | 0.35±0.06 | 0.36±0.09 | 0.35±0.07 |
W1 – one week; W4 – four weeks; M3 – three months; M6 – six months. The control subjects data of the values MD and FA derived from the mean values from both left and right sides at each location. Two sample t test:
compared to the same time points, controls, P<0.05; MRANOVA:
compared to patients, W1,
compared to patients, W4,
compared to patients, M3, P<0.05 respectively.
MD values of thalamic fiber pathway at each time point (n=12).
| Locations in corona radiata pathway | W1 | W4 | M3 | M6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients ipsilesinal side | ||||
| Thalamus | 0.64±0.03 | 0.65±0.02 | 0.65±0.03 | 0.64±0.03 |
| Corona radiata | 0.67±0.02 | 0.68±0.02 | 0.68±0.01 | 0.68±0.01 |
| Semiovale | 0.70±0.02 | 0.73±0.03 | 0.72±0.07 | 0.72±0.03 |
| Patients contralesional side | ||||
| Thalamus | 0.64±0.03 | 0.65±0.03 | 0.63±0.03 | 0.64±0.03 |
| Corona radiata | 0.66±0.04 | 0.67±0.04 | 0.65±0.03 | 0.66±0.02 |
| Semiovale | 0.72±0.03 | 0.73±0.05 | 0.74±0.02 | 0.73±0.03 |
| Controls | ||||
| Thalamus | 0.65±0.02 | 0.66±0.06 | 0.65±0.05 | 0.66±0.04 |
| Corona radiata | 0.66±0.01 | 0.65±0.04 | 0.66±0.03 | 0.66±0.05 |
| Semiovale | 0.71±0.02 | 0.70±0.07 | 0.71±0.04 | 0.71±0.05 |
W1 – one week; W4 – four weeks; M3 – three months; M6 – six months. For controls, The MD and FA values were derived from the mean values from both left and right sides at each location.
Clinical scores at four time points (n=12).
| W1 | W4 | M3 | M6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIHSS | 5.92±3.70 | 3.25±2.49 | 2.00±1.91 | 0.83±1.27 |
| NIHSS8 | 1.42±0.51 | 1.25±0.45 | 0.75±0.45 | 0.25±0.45 |
| BI | 57.08±14.84 | 73.75±16.11 | 86.22±9.95 | 95.97±8.54 |
W1 – one week; W4 – four weeks; M3 – three months; M6 – six months; NIHSS – National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; NIHSS8 – Paragraph 8 of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score; BI – Barthel Index. MRANOVA:
compared to W1,
compared to W4,
compared to M3, P<0.05 respectively.
According to MRANOVA, patients’ NIHSS and NIHSS8 scores decreased, but BI scores increased gradually from W1 to M6. These results indicated that neurological function recovered gradually from W1 to M6 in the patients.
Correlations between the percentage changes in the FA value and clinical score (n=12).
| Region of FA value | NIHSS r (P) | NIHSS8 r (P) | BI r (P) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients ipsilesinal side | |||
| Thalamus | −0.345 (0.000) | −0.209 (0.000) | 0.373 (0.001) |
| Corona radiata | −0.404 (0.000) | −0.369 (0.001) | 0.368 (0.011) |
| Semiovale | −0.319 (0.000) | −0.267 (0.000) | 0.424 (0.027) |
| Patients contralesional side | |||
| Thalamus | −0.274 (0.062) | −0.136 (0.362) | 0.244 (0.098) |
| Corona radiata | −0.187 (0.000) | −0.232 (0.02) | 0.267 (0.011) |
| Semiovale | −0.294 (0.000) | −0.341 (0.000) | 0.319 (0.003) |
NIHSS – National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; NIHSS8 – Paragraph 8 of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score; BI – Barthel Index. Spearman correlation analysis:
P<0.01;
P<0.05.