fMRI as a molecular imaging procedure for the functional reorganization of motor systems in chronic stroke

Lazaridou,Asimina; Astrakas,Loukas; Mintzopoulos,Dionyssios; Khanchiceh,Azadeh; Singhal,Aneesh; Moskowitz,Michael; Rosen,Bruce; Tzika,Aria

doi:10.3892/mmr.2013.1603

fMRI as a molecular imaging procedure for the functional reorganization of motor systems in chronic stroke

Authors:
- Asimina Lazaridou
- Loukas Astrakas
- Dionyssios Mintzopoulos
- Azadeh Khanchiceh
- Aneesh Singhal
- Michael Moskowitz
- Bruce Rosen
- Aria Tzika
View Affiliations

Affiliations: NMR Surgical Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital and Shriners Burn Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA, Mechanical Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA, Department of Neurology, Stroke Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA, Radiology, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Boston, MA, USA
Published online on: July 26, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2013.1603
Pages: 775-779

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Previous brain imaging studies suggest that stroke alters functional connectivity in motor execution networks. Moreover, current understanding of brain plasticity has led to new approaches in stroke rehabilitation. Recent studies showed a significant role of effective coupling of neuronal activity in the SMA (supplementary motor area) and M1 (primary motor cortex) network for motor outcome in patients after stroke. After a subcortical stroke, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during movement reveals cortical reorganization that is associated with the recovery of function. The aim of the present study was to explore connectivity alterations within the motor-related areas combining motor fMRI with a novel MR-compatible hand-induced robotic device (MR_CHIROD) training. Patients completed training at home and underwent serial MR evaluation at baseline and after 8 weeks of training. Training at home consisted of squeezing a gel exercise ball with the paretic hand at ~75% of maximum strength for 1 h/day, 3 days/week. The fMRI analysis revealed alterations in M1, SMA, PMC (premotor cortex) and Cer (cerebellum) in both stroke patients and healthy controls after the training. Findings of the present study suggest that enhancement of SMA activity could benefit M1 dysfunction in stroke survivors. These results also indicate that connectivity alterations between motor areas might assist the counterbalance of a functionally abnormal M1 in chronic stroke survivors and possibly other patients with motor dysfunction.

View Figures

View References

1	Hall MJ, Levant S and DeFrances CJ: Hospitalization for stroke in U.S. hospitals, 1989–2009. NCHS Data Brief: 1–8. 2012
2	Evers SM, Ament AJ and Blaauw G: Economic evaluation in stroke research: a systematic review. Stroke. 31:1046–1053. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Payne KA, Huybrechts KF, Caro JJ, Craig Green TJ and Klittich WS: Long term cost-of-illness in stroke: an international review. Pharmacoeconomics. 20:813–825. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Astrakas LG, Naqvi SH, Kateb B and Tzika AA: Functional MRI using robotic MRI compatible devices for monitoring rehabilitation from chronic stroke in the molecular medicine era (Review). Int J Mol Med. 29:963–973. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
5	Twitchell TE: Variations and abnormalities of motor development. Phys Ther. 45:424–430. 1965.PubMed/NCBI
6	Grefkes C, Nowak DA, Eickhoff SB, et al: Cortical connectivity after subcortical stroke assessed with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol. 63:236–246. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Wang LE, Tittgemeyer M, Imperati D, et al: Degeneration of corpus callosum and recovery of motor function after stroke: a multimodal magnetic resonance imaging study. Hum Brain Mapp. 33:2941–2956. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Mintzopoulos D, Astrakas LG, Khanicheh A, et al: Connectivity alterations assessed by combining fMRI and MR-compatible hand robots in chronic stroke. Neuroimage. 47(Suppl 2): T90–T97. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Murphy TH and Corbett D: Plasticity during stroke recovery: from synapse to behaviour. Nat Rev Neurosci. 10:861–872. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Chollet F, DiPiero V, Wise RJ, Brooks DJ, Dolan RJ and Frackowiak RS: The functional anatomy of motor recovery after stroke in humans: a study with positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol. 29:63–71. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Weiller C: Imaging recovery from stroke. Exp Brain Res. 123:13–17. 1998.(In German).
12	Cramer SC: Stroke recovery. Lessons from functional MR imaging and other methods of human brain mapping. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 10:875–886. 1999.PubMed/NCBI
13	Cramer SC: Brain repair after stroke. N Engl J Med. 362:1827–1829. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Seitz RJ: Stroke recovery: the pyramid in focus. Neurology. 74:276–277. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Ogawa S and Lee TM: Magnetic resonance imaging of blood vessels at high fields: in vivo and in vitro measurements and image simulation. Magn Reson Med. 16:9–18. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Amaro E Jr and Barker GJ: Study design in fMRI: basic principles. Brain Cogn. 60:220–232. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Smith SM: The future of FMRI connectivity. Neuroimage. 62:1257–1266. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Brodal A: Self-observations and neuro-anatomical considerations after a stroke. Brain. 96:675–694. 1973. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Smith PS, Dinse HR, Kalisch T, Johnson M and Walker-Batson D: Effects of repetitive electrical stimulation to treat sensory loss in persons poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 90:2108–2111. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Ietswaart M, Johnston M, Dijkerman HC, et al: Mental practice with motor imagery in stroke recovery: randomized controlled trial of efficacy. Brain. 134:1373–1386. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N, McDowell F and Volpe BT: The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol. 54:443–446. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelstein OL, Diels C and Aisen M: A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation: robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology. 54:1938–1944. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelsteinn L, Diels CM and Aisen ML: Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years. Neurology. 53:1874–1876. 1999.PubMed/NCBI
24	Volpe BT, Krebs HI and Hogan N: Is robot-aided sensorimotor training in stroke rehabilitation a realistic option? Curr Opin Neurol. 14:745–752. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Lynch D, et al: Robotics and other devices in the treatment of patients recovering from stroke. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 5:465–470. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Krebs HI and Hogan N: Robotics in the rehabilitation treatment of patients with stroke. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 4:270–276. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Ferraro M, Palazzolo JJ, Krol J, Krebs HI, Hogan N and Volpe BT: Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke. Neurology. 61:1604–1607. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hughes R and Hogan N: Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: follow-up results. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 85:1106–1111. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Daly JJ, Hogan N, Perepezko EM, et al: Response to upper-limb robotics and functional neuromuscular stimulation following stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 42:723–736. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Macclellan LR, Bradham DD, Whitall J, et al: Robotic upper-limb neurorehabilitation in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Res Dev. 42:717–722. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
31	Finley MA, Fasoli SE, Dipietro L, et al: Short-duration robotic therapy in stroke patients with severe upper-limb motor impairment. J Rehabil Res Dev. 42:683–692. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32	Prange GB, Jannink MJ, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Hermens HJ and Ijzerman MJ: Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 43:171–184. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Khanicheh A, Mintzopoulos D, Weinberg B, Tzika AA and Mavroidis C: MR_CHIROD 2: magnetic resonance compatible smart hand rehabilitation device for brain imaging. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 16:91–98. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Tsekos N, Khanicheh A, Christoforou E and Mavroidis C: Magnetic resonance-compatible robotic and mechatronics systems for image-guided interventions and rehabilitation: a review study. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 9:351–387. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
35	Siekierka EM, Eng K, Bassetti C, et al: New technologies and concepts for rehabilitation in the acute phase of stroke: a collaborative matrix. Neurodegener Dis. 4:57–69. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Mintzopoulos D, Khanicheh A, Konstas A, et al: Functional MRI of rehabilitation in chronic stroke patients using novel MR-compatible hand robots. Open Neuroimag J. 2:94–101. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Cramer SC, Weisskoff RM, Schaechter JD, et al: Motor cortex activation is related to force of squeezing. Hum Brain Mapp. 16:197–205. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
38	Yu H, Sternad D, Corcos DM and Vaillancourt DE: Role of hyperactive cerebellum and motor cortex in Parkinson’s disease. Neuroimage. 35:222–233. 2007.
39	Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ and Krebs HI: Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 22:111–121. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	Mehrholz J, Werner C, Kugler J and Pohl M: Electromechanical-assisted gait training with physiotherapy may improve walking after stroke. Stroke. Apr 3–2008.(Epub ahead of print).
41	Langhammer B and Stanghelle JK: Can physiotherapy after stroke based on the Bobath concept result in improved quality of movement compared to the motor relearning programme. Physiotherapy research international. Physiother Res Int. 16:69–80. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar
42	Langhammer B, Stanghelle JK and Lindmark B: An evaluation of two different exercise regimes during the first year following stroke: a randomised controlled trial. Physiother Theory Pract. 25:55–68. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
43	Xerri C, Merzenich MM, Peterson BE and Jenkins W: Plasticity of primary somatosensory cortex paralleling sensorimotor skill recovery from stroke in adult monkeys. J Neurophysiol. 79:2119–2148. 1998.PubMed/NCBI
44	Aizawa H, Inase M, Mushiake H, Shima K and Tanji J: Reorganization of activity in the supplementary motor area associated with motor learning and functional recovery. Exp Brain Res. 84:668–671. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
45	Jones TA and Schallert T: Overgrowth and pruning of dendrites in adult rats recovering from neocortical damage. Brain Res. 581:156–160. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
46	Boyd LA, Edwards JD, Siengsukon CS, Vidoni ED, Wessel BD and Linsdell MA: Motor sequence chunking is impaired by basal ganglia stroke. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 92:35–44. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
47	Ward NS: Mechanisms underlying recovery of motor function after stroke. Postgrad Med J. 81:510–514. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
48	Hummel F and Cohen LG: Improvement of motor function with noninvasive cortical stimulation in a patient with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 19:14–19. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI