| Literature DB >> 33281704 |
Massimiliano Toscano1,2, Maria Ricci3, Claudia Celletti4, Marco Paoloni5, Marco Ruggiero4, Alessandro Viganò6, Tommaso B Jannini1,7, Alberto Altarocca4, Mauro Liberatore8, Filippo Camerota4, Vittorio Di Piero1.
Abstract
Focal repetitive muscle vibration (fMV) is a safe and well-tolerated non-invasive brain and peripheral stimulation (NIBS) technique, easy to perform at the bedside, and able to promote the post-stroke motor recovery through conditioning the stroke-related dysfunctional structures and pathways. Here we describe the concurrent cortical and spinal plasticity induced by fMV in a chronic stroke survivor, as assessed with 99mTc-HMPAO SPECT, peripheral nerve stimulation, and gait analysis. A 72-years-old patient was referred to our stroke clinic for a right leg hemiparesis and spasticity resulting from a previous (4 years before) hemorrhagic stroke. He reported a subjective improvement of his right leg's spasticity and dysesthesia that occurred after a30-min ride on a Vespa scooter as a passenger over the Roman Sampietrini (i.e., cubic-shaped cobblestones). Taking into account both the patient's anecdote and the current guidelines that recommend fMV for the treatment of post-stroke spasticity, we then decided to start fMV treatment. 12 fMV sessions (frequency 100 Hz; amplitude range 0.2-0.5 mm, three 10-min daily sessions per week for 4 consecutive weeks) were applied over the quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, and hamstring muscles through a specific commercial device (Cro®System, NEMOCOsrl). A standardized clinical and instrumental evaluation was performed before (T0) the first fMV session and after (T1) the last one. After fMV treatment, we observed a clinically relevant motor and functional improvement, as assessed by comparing the post-treatment changes in the score of the Fugl-Meyer assessment, the Motricity Index score, the gait analysis, and the Ashworth modified scale, with the respective minimal detectable change at the 95% confidence level (MDC95). Data from SPECT and peripheral nerve stimulation supported the evidence of a concurrent brain and spinal plasticity promoted by fMV treatment trough activity-dependent changes in cortical perfusion and motoneuron excitability, respectively. In conclusion, the substrate of post-stroke motor recovery induced by fMV involves a concurrently acting multisite plasticity (i.e., cortical and spinal plasticity). In our patient, operant conditioning of both cortical perfusion and motoneuron excitability throughout a month of fMV treatment was related to a clinically relevant improvement in his strength, step symmetry (with reduced limping), and spasticity.Entities:
Keywords: brain plasticity; focal muscle vibration; motor recovery; spinal cord plasticity; stroke
Year: 2020 PMID: 33281704 PMCID: PMC7705992 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.567833
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1Study flow chart—clinical and instrumental evaluation was performed before (T0) the first fMV session and 7 days after the last one (T1).
Figure 299mTc-HMPAO brain perfusion SPECT scan at baseline in sagittal (1a), coronal (1b), and transaxial (1c) reconstruction; 99mTc-HMPAO perfusion brain SPECT scan after fMV treatment in sagittal (2a), coronal (2b) and transaxial (2c) reconstruction. SPECT images show an increased 99mTc-HMPAO distribution rate after fMV treatment in left frontal region (1a vs. 2a), in left parietal region (1b vs. 2b), in left occipital region (1c vs. 2c).
Characteristics of the H-reflex elicited through stimulation of the tibial nerve.
| Tibial nerve (T0) | 24 | 19 | 14.3 | 1 | 81.9% |
| Tibial nerve (T1) | 16 | 13 | 19.05 | 0.1 | 25.9% |
(H latency, H amplitude, H/M ratio, maximal M wave (M max), and HR (H max)). See the text for details.
SPECT–Data comparing T0 and T1 assessments of cerebral perfusion.
| Cort. Right | 5 | −5 | −1.2 | 5 | −5 | −1.5 |
| Cort. Left | 3.6 | −5 | −3.3 | 5 | −5 | −2.8 |
| Front. Right | 5 | −5 | −1.4 | 5 | −5 | −1.7 |
| Front. Left | 3.6 | −5 | −3.1 | 5 | −5 | −2.9 |
| Occ. Right | 4.4 | −5 | 0.5 | 5 | −5 | 1.1 |
| Occ. Left | 1.5 | −5 | −2.7 | 3.7 | −5 | −1.6 |
| Par. Right | 3.6 | −5 | −0.4 | 5 | −5 | 0 |
| Par. Left | 3.2 | −5 | −2.6 | 5 | −5 | −1.7 |
| Temp. Right | 4.8 | −5 | −1.5 | 4.9 | −5 | −2.1 |
| Temp. Left | 5 | −5 | −3.6 | 3.8 | −5 | −3.2 |
| Whole | 5 | −5 | −1.9 | 5 | −5 | −1.6 |
To define the regions of interest (ROI), NeuroGam software (Segami-Corporation, .