| Literature DB >> 30312350 |
Nele De Bruyn1, Sarah Meyer1, Simon S Kessner2, Bea Essers1, Bastian Cheng2, Götz Thomalla2, Andre Peeters3, Stefan Sunaert4,5, Thierry Duprez6, Vincent Thijs7,8, Hilde Feys1, Kaat Alaerts1, Geert Verheyden1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aberrant functional connectivity in brain networks associated with motor impairment after stroke is well described, but little is known about the association with somatosensory impairments. AIM: The objective of this cross-sectional observational study was to investigate the relationship between brain functional connectivity and severity of somatosensory impairments in the upper limb in the acute phase post stroke.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30312350 PMCID: PMC6185852 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205693
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
MNI coordinates of the twelve regions-of-interests (ROIs) of the somatosensory processing network adopted to explore ROI-to-ROI resting-state functional connectivity.
| LEFT | RIGHT | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x | y | z | x | y | z | ||
| Primary sensorimotor cortex | -63 | -23 | 47 | 54 | -23 | 44 | |
| Superior parietal cortex | -29 | -48 | 64 | 17 | -54 | 50 | |
| Supplementary motor cortex | -4 | -10 | 57 | 7 | -9 | 64 | |
| Inferior parietal cortex | -54 | -43 | 31 | 56 | -36 | 30 | |
| Insula | -28 | -11 | 20 | 44 | -19 | 12 | |
| Cerebellum | -23 | -63 | -37 | 18 | -56 | -25 | |
According to Chang et al. 2009. MNI: Montreal Neurological Institute
Fig 1Group lesion overlay image.
Fig 1 displays the lesion location of all patients. All lesions were flipped to the right site. Color indicates the lesion locations from red (not lesioned in any patient) to yellow (lesioned in most patients).
Patient characteristics (n = 19).
| Total | Mild to moderate | Severe | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age stroke onset, years: median (IQR) | 76.6 (66.1–85.8) | 76.8 (75.5–81.8) | 74.6 (50.3–87.5) | |
| Gender: n (%) | ||||
| Male | 8 (42.1) | 5 (50) | 3 (33.3) | |
| Female | 11 (57.9) | 5 (50) | 6 (66.7) | |
| Centre: n (%) | ||||
| University Hospitals Leuven | 7 (36.8) | 6 (60) | 1 (11.1) | |
| Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc | 12 (63.2) | 4 (40) | 8 (88.9) | |
| Days after stroke: median (IQR) | 6 (5–7) | 6 (5.8–7) | 6 (5–7) | |
| Lateralisation: n (%) | ||||
| Right hemisphere lesion | 15 (78.9) | 8 (80) | 2 (22.2) | |
| Left hemisphere lesion | 4 (21.1) | 2 (20) | 7 (77.8) | |
| Type of stroke: n (%) | ||||
| Ischemia | 14 (73.7) | 7 (70) | 7 (77.8) | |
| Haemorrhage | 5 (26.3) | 3 (30) | 2 (22.2) | |
| Hand dominance: n (%) | ||||
| Left | 1 (5.3) | 1 (10) | 0 (0) | |
| Right | 18 (94.7) | 9 (90) | 9 (100) | |
| National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (/42): median (IQR) | 9 (6–15) | 8 (6–11.5) | 13 (7–17) | |
| Fugl-Meyer, upper extremity (/66): median (IQR) | 4 (2–55) | 7 (2–55.5) | 4 (3–51.5) | |
| Em-NSA- total (/32): median (IQR) | 13 (0–29) | 29 (18.8–32) | 0 (0–5) | |
| Em-NSA- light touch (/8): median (IQR) | 5 (0–7) | 6.5 (6–8) | 0 (0–0) | |
| Em-NSA- pressure (/8): median (IQR) | 4 (0–8) | 8 (5–8) | 0 (0–3) | |
| Em-NSA- pinprick (/8): median (IQR) | 4 (0–8) | 8 (8–8) | 0 (0–2) | |
| Em-NSA- sharp-dull discrimination (/8): median (IQR) | 0 (0–7) | 6.5 (1.5–8) | 0 (0–0) | |
| NSA- stereognosis (/22): median (IQR) | 0 (0–19) | 17 (1.5–21) | 0 (0–0) | |
| Two-point discrimination (/16): median (IQR) | 16 (16–16) | 16 (16–16) | 16 (4.8–16) | |
| Perceptual threshold of touch (/11) median (IQR) (n = 18): | 6 (4.4–11) | 11 (11–11) | 4.8 (3.9–5.5) | |
| Functional connectivity- Interhemispheric network: mean (SD) | 0.336 (0.125) | 0.419 (0.093) | 0.245 (0.096) | |
| Functional connectivity- Ipsilesional intrahemispheric network: mean (SD) | 0.065 (0.083) | 0.102 (0.089) | 0.018 (0.045) | |
| Functional connectivity- Contralesional intrahemispheric network: mean (SD) | 0.082 (0.081) | 0.091 (0.090) | 0.071(0.073) | |
Table 2 provides the patient characteristics for the total group (left) and mild to moderate (middle) or severe (right) separately. Functional connectivity is displayed with z-transformed r-values for the different indices without values of connections containing a ROI located in the lesion area. Ipsilesional intrahemispheric network consist of connectivity values of all persons without the outlier.
IQR: interquartile rage; Em-NSA: Erasmus MC modified (revised) Nottingham sensory assessment; NSA: Nottingham Sensory Assessment SD: standard deviation.
Fig 2Prevalence of somatosensory deficits.
Fig 2 displays the prevalence of somatosensory deficits for each subscale of the Em-NSA, Two-poindiscrimination test and Peceptual Threshold of Touch. Em-NSA: Erasmus MC modified (revised) Nottingham sensory assessment; NSA: Nottingham sensory assessment (gray scale, 1.5 colllum).
Fig 3Group differences in somatosensory network connectivity between patients with severe and mild to moderate somatosensory impairment.
Fig 3 shows the differences in functional connectivity between subgroups, investigated by a general linear model with the index of network connectivity as dependent variable; ‘group’ (severe, mild to moderate) as between-subject factor, and age, centre (stroke unit where data were collected) and mean framewise displacement (FD) as covariates of no interest (nuisance regressors). Patients with severe somatosensory impairments (Em-NSA <13/32) displayed significantly lower network intrinsic connectivity in the ipsilesional intrahemispheric and interhemispheric network compared to patients with mild to moderate somatosensory impairments (Em-NSA ≥13/32). Networks are displayed in frontal plane in back view; Error bars display the Standard Error of mean; *p< 0.05; ** p<0.01; ***p<0.001 (gray scale, 2-collum fitting).
Partial correlations (non-parametric) between network indices and somatosensory modalities.
| Light Touch | Pressure | Pinprick | Perceptual Threshold of Touch | Sharp/Dull discrimination | Stereognosis | Two-point discrimination | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ipsilesional intrahemispheric network | 0.48 | 0.40 | 0.31 | 0.19 | 0.33 | -0.35 | |
| Contralesional intrahemispheric network1 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.22 | -0.42 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.01 |
| Interhemispheric network | 0.45 | 0.48 | 0.42 | -0.28 |
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed); Control variables: age, centre, mean framewise displacement; df = 14
1df = 13
2df = 12
Fig 4Brain-behaviour associations between specific somatosensory modalities.
Correlation plots between behavioural assessment and residuals of the partial correlations with the index inter- or intrahemispheric functional connectivity. Correlation plot between the perceptual threshold of touch and ipsilesional intrahemispheric network (A) and interhemispheric network (B); correlation plot between interhemispheric network and light touch (C) and stereognosis (D). (gray scale; 2-collum fitting).