Loading…
Differential early predictive factors for upper and lower extremity motor recovery after ischaemic stroke
No early factors for predicting motor recovery after stroke are noticeably different for upper and lower extremities. Upper extremity recovery is related to damage to the ipsilesional corticospinal tract and lesion volume. In contrast, lower extremity recovery is related to damage to the bilateral c...
Saved in:
| Published in: | European journal of neurology 2021-01, Vol.28 (1), p.132-140 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003 |
| container_end_page | 140 |
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 132 |
| container_title | European journal of neurology |
| container_volume | 28 |
| creator | Lee, J. Kim, H. Kim, J. Lee, H.‐J. Chang, W. H. Kim, Y.‐H. |
| description | No early factors for predicting motor recovery after stroke are noticeably different for upper and lower extremities. Upper extremity recovery is related to damage to the ipsilesional corticospinal tract and lesion volume. In contrast, lower extremity recovery is related to damage to the bilateral corticospinal tract and the proposed novel factor which is the normalized difference between early cognitive and motor function impairment. Lower extremity recovery is more strongly modulated by the relationship between motor and non‐motor functions compared with upper extremity recovery.
Background and purpose
Various clinical and neuroimaging predictive factors have been identified for the recovery of upper extremity (UE) motor function after stroke. However, few studies have addressed factors related to the recovery of lower extremity (LE) motor function after stroke or performed direct comparisons of UE and LE motor recovery in the same set of patients. In this study, predictive factors for UE and LE motor recovery after stroke were investigated using clinical and neuroimaging characteristics.
Methods
Forty‐two subacute ischaemic stroke patients underwent structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging data acquisition and cognitive/behavioral assessments using the Fugl–Meyer assessment, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) 2 weeks after stroke onset. Neuroimaging factors, including corticospinal tract (CST) fractional anisotropy, lesion volume, CST lesion load and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity, were extracted. The outcome of motor function was assessed by Fugl–Meyer assessment scores 3 months after onset.
Results
Early clinical and neuroimaging factors for predicting motor recovery were noticeably different for UE and LE. UE motor function recovery was related to age, NIHSS, MMSE, CST lesion load, lesion volume, ipsilesional CST integrity and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity. In contrast, LE motor recovery was related to ipsilesional and contralesional CST integrity and MMSE. Specifically, LE recovery showed a strong relationship to the preservation of cognitive function compared with motor impairment.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that different mechanisms underlie UE and LE motor recovery after stroke. LE motor recovery seems to be more intensively modulated by cognitive functions than UE. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/ene.14494 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2439975838</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2439975838</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1L7jAQhYNc8Xtx_4AE7kYX1aSTtOlS9PUDRDe6LnmbCcbbNjVp1f57o6-6EJzNHJiHw5lDyF_OjniaY-zxiAtRiTWyxUWhMg7A_yQNkmeSM75JtmN8ZIzlZc42yCbkSnFeFlvEnTlrMWA_Ot1S1KGd6RDQuGZ0z0itbkYfIrU-0GkYMFDdG9r6l6TwdQzYuXGmnU8QDdj4Zwwz1XZMZxebB53uDY1j8P9xl6xb3Ubc-9w75P58cXd6mV3fXlydnlxnDUgQmc3TXiIIqZZMlrhUuWHKcpFLoypbFKbMTSFANaCNESAAC2AgmZQsPcdghxysfIfgnyaMY92lKNi2ukc_xToXUFWlVKAS-u8H-uin0Kd0iSp5JQsOPFGHK6oJPsaAth6C63SYa87q9_7r1H_90X9i9z8dp2WH5pv8KjwBxyvgxbU4_-5UL24WK8s36WqOwQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2471956131</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differential early predictive factors for upper and lower extremity motor recovery after ischaemic stroke</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>Lee, J. ; Kim, H. ; Kim, J. ; Lee, H.‐J. ; Chang, W. H. ; Kim, Y.‐H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lee, J. ; Kim, H. ; Kim, J. ; Lee, H.‐J. ; Chang, W. H. ; Kim, Y.‐H.</creatorcontrib><description>No early factors for predicting motor recovery after stroke are noticeably different for upper and lower extremities. Upper extremity recovery is related to damage to the ipsilesional corticospinal tract and lesion volume. In contrast, lower extremity recovery is related to damage to the bilateral corticospinal tract and the proposed novel factor which is the normalized difference between early cognitive and motor function impairment. Lower extremity recovery is more strongly modulated by the relationship between motor and non‐motor functions compared with upper extremity recovery.
Background and purpose
Various clinical and neuroimaging predictive factors have been identified for the recovery of upper extremity (UE) motor function after stroke. However, few studies have addressed factors related to the recovery of lower extremity (LE) motor function after stroke or performed direct comparisons of UE and LE motor recovery in the same set of patients. In this study, predictive factors for UE and LE motor recovery after stroke were investigated using clinical and neuroimaging characteristics.
Methods
Forty‐two subacute ischaemic stroke patients underwent structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging data acquisition and cognitive/behavioral assessments using the Fugl–Meyer assessment, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) 2 weeks after stroke onset. Neuroimaging factors, including corticospinal tract (CST) fractional anisotropy, lesion volume, CST lesion load and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity, were extracted. The outcome of motor function was assessed by Fugl–Meyer assessment scores 3 months after onset.
Results
Early clinical and neuroimaging factors for predicting motor recovery were noticeably different for UE and LE. UE motor function recovery was related to age, NIHSS, MMSE, CST lesion load, lesion volume, ipsilesional CST integrity and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity. In contrast, LE motor recovery was related to ipsilesional and contralesional CST integrity and MMSE. Specifically, LE recovery showed a strong relationship to the preservation of cognitive function compared with motor impairment.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that different mechanisms underlie UE and LE motor recovery after stroke. LE motor recovery seems to be more intensively modulated by cognitive functions than UE.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1351-5101</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-1331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ene.14494</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32881176</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Anisotropy ; Cerebral hemispheres ; cerebral infarction ; Cognitive ability ; Data acquisition ; Functional magnetic resonance imaging ; Homotopy theory ; Integrity ; Lesions ; lower extremity ; Magnetic resonance imaging ; Medical imaging ; Neural networks ; Neuroimaging ; Pyramidal tracts ; Recovery ; recovery of function ; Stroke ; Structure-function relationships ; upper extremity</subject><ispartof>European journal of neurology, 2021-01, Vol.28 (1), p.132-140</ispartof><rights>2020 European Academy of Neurology</rights><rights>2020 European Academy of Neurology.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 European Academy of Neurology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6101-8851</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fene.14494$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fene.14494$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,27957,27958,50923,51032</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32881176$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lee, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, H.‐J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chang, W. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Y.‐H.</creatorcontrib><title>Differential early predictive factors for upper and lower extremity motor recovery after ischaemic stroke</title><title>European journal of neurology</title><addtitle>Eur J Neurol</addtitle><description>No early factors for predicting motor recovery after stroke are noticeably different for upper and lower extremities. Upper extremity recovery is related to damage to the ipsilesional corticospinal tract and lesion volume. In contrast, lower extremity recovery is related to damage to the bilateral corticospinal tract and the proposed novel factor which is the normalized difference between early cognitive and motor function impairment. Lower extremity recovery is more strongly modulated by the relationship between motor and non‐motor functions compared with upper extremity recovery.
Background and purpose
Various clinical and neuroimaging predictive factors have been identified for the recovery of upper extremity (UE) motor function after stroke. However, few studies have addressed factors related to the recovery of lower extremity (LE) motor function after stroke or performed direct comparisons of UE and LE motor recovery in the same set of patients. In this study, predictive factors for UE and LE motor recovery after stroke were investigated using clinical and neuroimaging characteristics.
Methods
Forty‐two subacute ischaemic stroke patients underwent structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging data acquisition and cognitive/behavioral assessments using the Fugl–Meyer assessment, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) 2 weeks after stroke onset. Neuroimaging factors, including corticospinal tract (CST) fractional anisotropy, lesion volume, CST lesion load and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity, were extracted. The outcome of motor function was assessed by Fugl–Meyer assessment scores 3 months after onset.
Results
Early clinical and neuroimaging factors for predicting motor recovery were noticeably different for UE and LE. UE motor function recovery was related to age, NIHSS, MMSE, CST lesion load, lesion volume, ipsilesional CST integrity and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity. In contrast, LE motor recovery was related to ipsilesional and contralesional CST integrity and MMSE. Specifically, LE recovery showed a strong relationship to the preservation of cognitive function compared with motor impairment.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that different mechanisms underlie UE and LE motor recovery after stroke. LE motor recovery seems to be more intensively modulated by cognitive functions than UE.</description><subject>Anisotropy</subject><subject>Cerebral hemispheres</subject><subject>cerebral infarction</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Data acquisition</subject><subject>Functional magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Homotopy theory</subject><subject>Integrity</subject><subject>Lesions</subject><subject>lower extremity</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Neuroimaging</subject><subject>Pyramidal tracts</subject><subject>Recovery</subject><subject>recovery of function</subject><subject>Stroke</subject><subject>Structure-function relationships</subject><subject>upper extremity</subject><issn>1351-5101</issn><issn>1468-1331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1L7jAQhYNc8Xtx_4AE7kYX1aSTtOlS9PUDRDe6LnmbCcbbNjVp1f57o6-6EJzNHJiHw5lDyF_OjniaY-zxiAtRiTWyxUWhMg7A_yQNkmeSM75JtmN8ZIzlZc42yCbkSnFeFlvEnTlrMWA_Ot1S1KGd6RDQuGZ0z0itbkYfIrU-0GkYMFDdG9r6l6TwdQzYuXGmnU8QDdj4Zwwz1XZMZxebB53uDY1j8P9xl6xb3Ubc-9w75P58cXd6mV3fXlydnlxnDUgQmc3TXiIIqZZMlrhUuWHKcpFLoypbFKbMTSFANaCNESAAC2AgmZQsPcdghxysfIfgnyaMY92lKNi2ukc_xToXUFWlVKAS-u8H-uin0Kd0iSp5JQsOPFGHK6oJPsaAth6C63SYa87q9_7r1H_90X9i9z8dp2WH5pv8KjwBxyvgxbU4_-5UL24WK8s36WqOwQ</recordid><startdate>202101</startdate><enddate>202101</enddate><creator>Lee, J.</creator><creator>Kim, H.</creator><creator>Kim, J.</creator><creator>Lee, H.‐J.</creator><creator>Chang, W. H.</creator><creator>Kim, Y.‐H.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6101-8851</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202101</creationdate><title>Differential early predictive factors for upper and lower extremity motor recovery after ischaemic stroke</title><author>Lee, J. ; Kim, H. ; Kim, J. ; Lee, H.‐J. ; Chang, W. H. ; Kim, Y.‐H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Anisotropy</topic><topic>Cerebral hemispheres</topic><topic>cerebral infarction</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Data acquisition</topic><topic>Functional magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Homotopy theory</topic><topic>Integrity</topic><topic>Lesions</topic><topic>lower extremity</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Neuroimaging</topic><topic>Pyramidal tracts</topic><topic>Recovery</topic><topic>recovery of function</topic><topic>Stroke</topic><topic>Structure-function relationships</topic><topic>upper extremity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lee, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, H.‐J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chang, W. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Y.‐H.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of neurology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lee, J.</au><au>Kim, H.</au><au>Kim, J.</au><au>Lee, H.‐J.</au><au>Chang, W. H.</au><au>Kim, Y.‐H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differential early predictive factors for upper and lower extremity motor recovery after ischaemic stroke</atitle><jtitle>European journal of neurology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Neurol</addtitle><date>2021-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>132</spage><epage>140</epage><pages>132-140</pages><issn>1351-5101</issn><eissn>1468-1331</eissn><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>No early factors for predicting motor recovery after stroke are noticeably different for upper and lower extremities. Upper extremity recovery is related to damage to the ipsilesional corticospinal tract and lesion volume. In contrast, lower extremity recovery is related to damage to the bilateral corticospinal tract and the proposed novel factor which is the normalized difference between early cognitive and motor function impairment. Lower extremity recovery is more strongly modulated by the relationship between motor and non‐motor functions compared with upper extremity recovery.
Background and purpose
Various clinical and neuroimaging predictive factors have been identified for the recovery of upper extremity (UE) motor function after stroke. However, few studies have addressed factors related to the recovery of lower extremity (LE) motor function after stroke or performed direct comparisons of UE and LE motor recovery in the same set of patients. In this study, predictive factors for UE and LE motor recovery after stroke were investigated using clinical and neuroimaging characteristics.
Methods
Forty‐two subacute ischaemic stroke patients underwent structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging data acquisition and cognitive/behavioral assessments using the Fugl–Meyer assessment, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) 2 weeks after stroke onset. Neuroimaging factors, including corticospinal tract (CST) fractional anisotropy, lesion volume, CST lesion load and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity, were extracted. The outcome of motor function was assessed by Fugl–Meyer assessment scores 3 months after onset.
Results
Early clinical and neuroimaging factors for predicting motor recovery were noticeably different for UE and LE. UE motor function recovery was related to age, NIHSS, MMSE, CST lesion load, lesion volume, ipsilesional CST integrity and interhemispheric homotopic functional connectivity. In contrast, LE motor recovery was related to ipsilesional and contralesional CST integrity and MMSE. Specifically, LE recovery showed a strong relationship to the preservation of cognitive function compared with motor impairment.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that different mechanisms underlie UE and LE motor recovery after stroke. LE motor recovery seems to be more intensively modulated by cognitive functions than UE.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>32881176</pmid><doi>10.1111/ene.14494</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6101-8851</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1351-5101 |
| ispartof | European journal of neurology, 2021-01, Vol.28 (1), p.132-140 |
| issn | 1351-5101 1468-1331 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2439975838 |
| source | Wiley |
| subjects | Anisotropy Cerebral hemispheres cerebral infarction Cognitive ability Data acquisition Functional magnetic resonance imaging Homotopy theory Integrity Lesions lower extremity Magnetic resonance imaging Medical imaging Neural networks Neuroimaging Pyramidal tracts Recovery recovery of function Stroke Structure-function relationships upper extremity |
| title | Differential early predictive factors for upper and lower extremity motor recovery after ischaemic stroke |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T15%3A33%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differential%20early%20predictive%20factors%20for%20upper%20and%20lower%20extremity%20motor%20recovery%20after%20ischaemic%20stroke&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20neurology&rft.au=Lee,%20J.&rft.date=2021-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=132&rft.epage=140&rft.pages=132-140&rft.issn=1351-5101&rft.eissn=1468-1331&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ene.14494&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2439975838%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-f2c35be3458b057eb82d08f1425d89f66d72d6438c3add4343e63035055072003%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2471956131&rft_id=info:pmid/32881176&rfr_iscdi=true |