| Literature DB >> 30532772 |
Pawel J Matusz1,2,3, Alexandra P Key3, Shirley Gogliotti4, Jennifer Pearson4, Megan L Auld5, Micah M Murray1,3,6,7, Nathalie L Maitre3,8.
Abstract
Cerebral palsy (CP) is predominantly a disorder of movement, with evidence of sensory-motor dysfunction. CIMT1 is a widely used treatment for hemiplegic CP. However, effects of CIMT on somatosensory processing remain unclear. To examine potential CIMT-induced changes in cortical tactile processing, we designed a prospective study, during which 10 children with hemiplegic CP (5 to 8 years old) underwent an intensive one-week-long nonremovable hard-constraint CIMT. Before and directly after the treatment, we recorded their cortical event-related potential (ERP) responses to calibrated light touch (versus a control stimulus) at the more and less affected hand. To provide insights into the core neurophysiological deficits in light touch processing in CP as well as into the plasticity of this function following CIMT, we analyzed the ERPs within an electrical neuroimaging framework. After CIMT, brain areas governing the more affected hand responded to touch in configurations similar to those activated by the hemisphere controlling the less affected hand before CIMT. This was in contrast to the affected hand where configurations resembled those of the more affected hand before CIMT. Furthermore, dysfunctional patterns of brain activity, identified using hierarchical ERP cluster analyses, appeared reduced after CIMT in proportion with changes in sensory-motor measures (grip or pinch movements). These novel results suggest recovery of functional sensory activation as one possible mechanism underlying the effectiveness of intensive constraint-based therapy on motor functions in the more affected upper extremity in CP. However, maladaptive effects on the less affected constrained extremity may also have occurred. Our findings also highlight the use of electrical neuroimaging as feasible methodology to measure changes in tactile function after treatment even in young children, as it does not require active participation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30532772 PMCID: PMC6250030 DOI: 10.1155/2018/1891978
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neural Plast ISSN: 1687-5443 Impact factor: 3.599
Characteristics of cerebral palsy in the tested patients.
| Subject | Sex | Age | More affected side | MACS | Preterm (<37 weeks) | Findings on clinical neuroimaging |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M | 8 | R | 2 | 0 | Partial agenesis of the left cerebellar hemisphere with mild rotational shift of the brainstem |
| 2 | F | 6 | L | 3 | 0 | Prominent neuronal migration disorder in the right hemisphere with dysgenesis |
| 3 | F | 8 | L | 1 | 1 | Right temporal cystic encephalomalacia |
| 4 | M | 6 | L | 2 | 1 | Left frontal parietal IVH, grade IV |
| 5 | M | 6 | L | 2 | 0 | Bilateral IVH grade III and prematurity with ventricular dilation, right PLIC |
| 6 | M | 8 | L | 2 | 1 | Right IVH grade IV, right PLIC |
| 7 | F | 6 | R | 1 | 0 | Stroke, left PLIC |
| 8 | F | 5 | L | 1 | 1 | Bacterial meningitis 36 weeks MRI, diffuse injury more marked on the right hemisphere |
| 9 | F | 5 | R | 2 | 0 | Ischemic lesions, left more prominent than right basal ganglia affected, PLIC not affected |
| 10 | M | 7 | R | 1 | 0 | Left subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhages |
PLIC: posterior limb of the internal capsule; IVH: intraventricular hemorrhage; MACS: manual abilities classification scores.
Results of the neurosensory tests as carried out for the more and less affected hand before the CIMT intervention.
| Test | Hand | Unit | Mean | Std. deviation |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Somatosensory registration | More affected | Semmes monofilament force in grams | 3.13 | .524 | .524 |
| Less affected | 2.99 | .329 | |||
|
| |||||
| Single-point localization | More affected | # correctly identified localisations (max. 4) | 2.50 | .707 | 0.264 |
| Less affected | 2.80 | .422 | |||
|
| |||||
| Two-point discrimination | More affected | Distance in millimeters | 4.90 | 2.079 | 0.046 |
| Less affected | 3.00 | 1.886 | |||
|
| |||||
| Stereognosis | More affected | # correctly identified pairs (max. 9) | 5.10 | 2.644 | 0.011 |
| Less affected | 7.70 | 1.160 | |||
|
| |||||
| Pinch | More affected | psi | 1.800 | .9189 | 0.001 |
| Less affected | 3.400 | .7746 | |||
|
| |||||
| Grip | More affected | psi | 4.1 | 2.1187 | <.001 |
| Less affected | 9.25 | 3.2081 | |||
Figure 1Flowchart of analytical steps performed in the present study. A multistep analysis framework was developed to identify the mechanisms within the somatosensory brain system contributing to impairments as well as (post-CIMT) to the recovery of motor function. In step 1, we compared ERPs to puff (and sham) stimuli to the more and less affected hand before and following CIMT. In step 2, we investigated whether CIMT modulated the strength of responses within statistically indistinguishable brain networks and/or through alternations in ERP topography. In step 3, we performed spatial correlations on ERPs to investigate whether CIMT influenced ERP topography by forcing the somatosensory system controlling the more affected hand to activate patterns of brain activity (“template maps”) more similar to those controlling the less affected hand. In step 4, to understand whether the observed associations were driven by relatively longer involvement of the more functional patterns of somatosensory brain activity, we, first, submitted group-averaged ERPs to a hierarchical cluster analysis and then fit the template maps detected in group-averaged ERPs to single-subject ERPs to test whether they were reliably present. Lastly, in step 5, we performed correlations between relative duration of the more functional template maps and relative changes in scores on the sensory and motor diagnostic CP tests, to test behavioral associations with observed patterns of somatosensory activity.
Figure 2Group-averaged ERPs from an exemplary electrode and accompanying sequential topographic maps over ~250–550 ms poststimulus. (a) Group-averaged ERPs from a right fronto-central scalp site (see inset) in response to all Side and Session conditions. Note the similarity of responses to the pre-CIMT less affected and post-CIMT more affected conditions as well as the responses to the pre-CIMT more affected and post-CIMT less affected conditions, particularly over the ~250–550 ms poststimulus period. (b) Sequential topographic maps (top view with left hemiscalp on the left and frontal regions upwards) of ERPs from all Side and Session conditions shown at 100 ms intervals over the poststimulus period. Again, note the same pattern of similarity as in (a).
Figure 3CIMT-induced effects on ERP topography across less and more affected hand. (a) Spatial correlation between ERPs from the pre-CIMT less affected hand and each of the other Side and Session conditions as a function of time. Note that while there is high positive spatial correlation over the initial ~200 ms poststimulus onset across all conditions, only the post-CIMT more affected hand ERP exhibited a high spatial correlation with the pre-CIMT less affected hand ERP over the ~250–550 ms poststimulus period. Both other conditions exhibited spatial correlations near 0. (b) Hierarchical topographic cluster analysis identified 3 template maps that characterized the 250–550 ms poststimulus period across all conditions (see insets). Single-subject fitting based on spatial correlation between these template maps and individual ERPs yielded the average percentage of time each of these three template maps characterized each condition. The bar graphs show that Map 1 was both clinically relevant and also that its presence changed in a manner consistent with beneficial plasticity; its mean duration decreased in the more affected hand post- vs. pre-CIMT. The presence of Map 1 also demonstrated a nonsignificant trend for maladaptive plasticity; its mean duration increased in the less affected hand post- vs. pre-CIMT. The graphs concerning Map 2 show that despite differing pre- vs. post-CIMT patterns for the less affected and more affected hands, there was no reliable evidence that the presence of this map was clinically relevant. The presence of Map 3 did not differ across conditions.
Results of the neurosensory tests as carried out for the more and less affected hand after the CIMT intervention.
| Test | Hand | Unit | Mean | Std. deviation |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Somatosensory registration | More affected | Semmes monofilament force in grams | 2.83 | .01 | .343 |
| Less affected | 2.83 | .00 | |||
|
| |||||
| Single-point localization | More affected | # correctly identified localisations (max. 4) | 2.90 | .32 | — |
| Less affected | 2.90 | .32 | |||
|
| |||||
| Two-point discrimination | More affected | Distance in millimeters | 3.89 | 1.90 | .037 |
| Less affected | 2.22 | .67 | |||
|
| |||||
| Stereognosis | More affected | # correctly identified pairs (max. 9) | 5.30 | 2.79 | <.025 |
| Less affected | 8.20 | 1.14 | |||
|
| |||||
| Pinch | More affected | psi | 1.88 | .78 | <.001 |
| Less affected | 3.30 | 1.06 | |||
|
| |||||
| Grip | More affected | psi | 4.1 | 2.28 | <.007 |
| Less affected | 7.10 | 2.81 | |||