16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Role of the Contralesional vs. Ipsilesional Hemisphere in Stroke Recovery

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Following a stroke, the resulting lesion creates contralateral motor impairment and an interhemispheric imbalance involving hyperexcitability of the contralesional hemisphere. Neuronal reorganization may occur on both the ipsilesional and contralesional hemispheres during recovery to regain motor functionality and therefore bilateral activation for the hemiparetic side is often observed. Although ipsilesional hemispheric reorganization is traditionally thought to be most important for successful recovery, definitive conclusions into the role and importance of the contralesional motor cortex remain under debate. Through examining recent research in functional neuroimaging investigating motor cortex changes post-stroke, as well as brain-computer interface (BCI) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) therapies, this review attempts to clarify the contributions of each hemisphere toward recovery. Several functional magnetic resonance imaging studies suggest that continuation of contralesional hemisphere hyperexcitability correlates with lesser recovery, however a subset of well-recovered patients demonstrate contralesional motor activity and show decreased functional capability when the contralesional hemisphere is inhibited. BCI therapy may beneficially activate either the contralesional or ipsilesional hemisphere, depending on the study design, for chronic stroke patients who are otherwise at a functional plateau. Repetitive TMS used to excite the ipsilesional motor cortex or inhibit the contralesional hemisphere has shown promise in enhancing stroke patients' recovery.

          Related collections

          Most cited references107

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2016 Update

          Circulation, 133(4)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke.

            In patients with chronic stroke, the primary motor cortex of the intact hemisphere (M1(intact hemisphere)) may influence functional recovery, possibly through transcallosal effects exerted over M1 in the lesioned hemisphere (M1(lesioned hemisphere)). Here, we studied interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) between M1(intact hemisphere) and M1(lesioned hemisphere) in the process of generation of a voluntary movement by the paretic hand in patients with chronic subcortical stroke and in healthy volunteers. IHI was evaluated in both hands preceding the onset of unilateral voluntary index finger movements (paretic hand in patients, right hand in controls) in a simple reaction time paradigm. IHI at rest and shortly after the Go signal were comparable in patients and controls. Closer to movement onset, IHI targeting the moving index finger turned into facilitation in controls but remained deep in patients, a finding that correlated with poor motor performance. These results document an abnormally high interhemispheric inhibitory drive from M1(intact hemisphere) to M1(lesioned hemisphere) in the process of generation of a voluntary movement by the paretic hand. It is conceivable that this abnormality could adversely influence motor recovery in some patients with subcortical stroke, an interpretation consistent with models of interhemispheric competition in motor and sensory systems.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Brain-machine interface in chronic stroke rehabilitation: a controlled study.

              Chronic stroke patients with severe hand weakness respond poorly to rehabilitation efforts. Here, we evaluated efficacy of daily brain-machine interface (BMI) training to increase the hypothesized beneficial effects of physiotherapy alone in patients with severe paresis in a double-blind sham-controlled design proof of concept study. Thirty-two chronic stroke patients with severe hand weakness were randomly assigned to 2 matched groups and participated in 17.8 ± 1.4 days of training rewarding desynchronization of ipsilesional oscillatory sensorimotor rhythms with contingent online movements of hand and arm orthoses (experimental group, n = 16). In the control group (sham group, n = 16), movements of the orthoses occurred randomly. Both groups received identical behavioral physiotherapy immediately following BMI training or the control intervention. Upper limb motor function scores, electromyography from arm and hand muscles, placebo-expectancy effects, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) blood oxygenation level-dependent activity were assessed before and after intervention. A significant group × time interaction in upper limb (combined hand and modified arm) Fugl-Meyer assessment (cFMA) motor scores was found. cFMA scores improved more in the experimental than in the control group, presenting a significant improvement of cFMA scores (3.41 ± 0.563-point difference, p = 0.018) reflecting a clinically meaningful change from no activity to some in paretic muscles. cFMA improvements in the experimental group correlated with changes in fMRI laterality index and with paretic hand electromyography activity. Placebo-expectancy scores were comparable for both groups. The addition of BMI training to behaviorally oriented physiotherapy can be used to induce functional improvements in motor function in chronic stroke patients without residual finger movements and may open a new door in stroke neurorehabilitation. Copyright © 2013 American Neurological Association.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Hum Neurosci
                Front Hum Neurosci
                Front. Hum. Neurosci.
                Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1662-5161
                21 September 2017
                2017
                : 11
                : 469
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison Madison, WI, United States
                [2] 2Department of Radiology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison Madison, WI, United States
                [3] 3Medical Scientist Training Program, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin—Madison Madison, WI, United States
                [4] 4Neuroscience Training Program, University of Wisconsin—Madison Madison, WI, United States
                [5] 5Department of Neurology, University of Wisconsin—Madison Madison, WI, United States
                [6] 6Department of Psychology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Wisconsin—Madison Madison, WI, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Mikhail Lebedev, Duke University, United States

                Reviewed by: Toshiki Tazoe, Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Medical Science, Japan; Pavel Lindberg, Centre for Psychiatry and Neuroscience (INSERM), France; Filippo Brighina, University of Palermo, Italy

                *Correspondence: Vivek Prabhakaran vprabhakaran@ 123456uwhealth.org
                Article
                10.3389/fnhum.2017.00469
                5613154
                28983244
                dfff5ac4-d61a-49ed-9a44-ad05cad860c0
                Copyright © 2017 Dodd, Nair and Prabhakaran.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 08 May 2017
                : 07 September 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 107, Pages: 9, Words: 7576
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health 10.13039/100000002
                Award ID: RC1MH090912-01
                Award ID: T32GM008692
                Award ID: UL1TR000427
                Award ID: K23NS086852
                Award ID: T32EB011434
                Award ID: R01EB000856-06
                Award ID: R01EB009103-01
                Funded by: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 10.13039/100000185
                Award ID: N66001-12-C-4025
                Award ID: N66001-11-1-4013
                Categories
                Neuroscience
                Mini Review

                Neurosciences
                ipsilesional,contralesional,stroke,motor recovery,brain-computer interface,transcranial magnetic stimulation

                Comments

                Comment on this article