White Matter Integrity and Chronic Poststroke Upper Limb Function: An ENIGMA Stroke Recovery Analysis.
corticospinal tract
diffusion tensor imaging
neuroimaging
stroke
upper extremity
white matter
Journal
Stroke
ISSN: 1524-4628
Titre abrégé: Stroke
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0235266
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
pmc-release:
01
09
2024
medline:
31
8
2023
pubmed:
19
7
2023
entrez:
19
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Integrity of the corticospinal tract (CST) is an important biomarker for upper limb motor function following stroke. However, when structurally compromised, other tracts may become relevant for compensation or recovery of function. We used the ENIGMA Stroke Recovery data set, a multicenter, retrospective, and cross-sectional collection of patients with upper limb impairment during the chronic phase of stroke to test the relevance of tracts in individuals with less and more severe (laterality index of CST fractional anisotropy ≥0.25) CST damage in an observational study design. White matter integrity was quantified using fractional anisotropy for the CST, the superior longitudinal fascicle, and the callosal fibers interconnecting the primary motor cortices between hemispheres. Optic radiations served as a control tract as they have no a priori relevance for the motor system. Pearson correlation was used for testing correlation with upper limb motor function (Fugl-Meyer upper extremity). From 1235 available data sets, 166 were selected (by imaging, Fugl-Meyer upper extremity, covariates, stroke location, and stage) for analyses. Only individuals with severe CST damage showed a positive association of fractional anisotropy in both callosal fibers interconnecting the primary motor cortices ( Our data support the notion that individuals with more severe damage of the CST depend on residual pathways for achieving better upper limb outcome than those with less affected CST.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Integrity of the corticospinal tract (CST) is an important biomarker for upper limb motor function following stroke. However, when structurally compromised, other tracts may become relevant for compensation or recovery of function.
METHODS
We used the ENIGMA Stroke Recovery data set, a multicenter, retrospective, and cross-sectional collection of patients with upper limb impairment during the chronic phase of stroke to test the relevance of tracts in individuals with less and more severe (laterality index of CST fractional anisotropy ≥0.25) CST damage in an observational study design. White matter integrity was quantified using fractional anisotropy for the CST, the superior longitudinal fascicle, and the callosal fibers interconnecting the primary motor cortices between hemispheres. Optic radiations served as a control tract as they have no a priori relevance for the motor system. Pearson correlation was used for testing correlation with upper limb motor function (Fugl-Meyer upper extremity).
RESULTS
From 1235 available data sets, 166 were selected (by imaging, Fugl-Meyer upper extremity, covariates, stroke location, and stage) for analyses. Only individuals with severe CST damage showed a positive association of fractional anisotropy in both callosal fibers interconnecting the primary motor cortices (
CONCLUSIONS
Our data support the notion that individuals with more severe damage of the CST depend on residual pathways for achieving better upper limb outcome than those with less affected CST.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37465999
doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.123.043713
pmc: PMC10529837
mid: NIHMS1915500
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2438-2441Subventions
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : P20 GM109040
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 HD075813
Pays : United States
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : R01 NS115845
Pays : United States
Références
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 Jul-Aug;26(6):594-603
pubmed: 22140195
Stroke. 2012 Aug;43(8):2248-51
pubmed: 22764214
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2017 Aug;26(8):1704-1711
pubmed: 28478977
Neuroimage. 2018 Feb 15;167:104-120
pubmed: 29155184
Brain. 2007 Jan;130(Pt 1):170-80
pubmed: 17148468
BMJ. 2007 Oct 20;335(7624):806-8
pubmed: 17947786
Cortex. 2020 Aug;129:80-98
pubmed: 32438012
Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):782-90
pubmed: 21979382
Neuroimage Clin. 2014 Nov 18;7:82-6
pubmed: 25610769
Brain Struct Funct. 2019 May;224(4):1447-1455
pubmed: 30778685
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13-31
pubmed: 1135616
Neuroimage. 2011 Feb 1;54(3):2033-44
pubmed: 20851191
Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Mar 09;10:101
pubmed: 27014032
Hum Brain Mapp. 2022 Jan;43(1):129-148
pubmed: 32310331
Behav Brain Res. 2016 Jul 15;308:152-9
pubmed: 27113682
Neuroimage Clin. 2021;29:102558
pubmed: 33513561
Neuroimage Clin. 2017 Mar 02;14:641-647
pubmed: 28348955
Neurology. 2022 May 12;:
pubmed: 35550551
Stroke. 2010 May;41(5):910-5
pubmed: 20378864