title: Neural substrates of good and poor recovery after hemiplegic stroke: a serial PET study.
abstract: In this study, we used positron emission tomography (PET) at two different time points to study the temporal evolution of reorganization in patients with good and those without motor recovery from hemiplegia after the occurrence of a stroke. Ten hemiplegic patients with a first subcortical stroke and five healthy control subjects were scanned during passive and active movements at an interval of 8 weeks. PET1 was performed 22.8 ± 7.8 days after the index stroke. At PET2, 8 weeks later, patients were dichotomized to either good recovery or no recovery according to the upper extremity motor component of the Fugl-Meyer score. Increases of regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) and comparison between groups at PET1 and PET2 were assessed using statistical parametric mapping. At PET 1, activation was found bilaterally in the inferior parietal cortex. Eight weeks later, patients with good recovery showed maximum activation in the contralateral primary somatosensory cortex and overactivation of the contralateral inferior parietal cortex. Patients with poor recovery showed bilateral activation with a maximum in the somatosensory cortex. Studies correlating activation patterns with quality of recovery may identify the neuroanatomical substrates that subserve improved motor function. Such studies may also guide the development of more effective rehabilitative interventions after the occurrence of stroke.
authors: Neurologisches Zentrum, St. Elisabeth-Krankenhaus, Werthmannstr. 1c, 50935, Cologne, Germany. gereon.nelles@uni-due.de
authors: G
authors: G
authors: Nelles
authors: W
authors: W
authors: Jentzen
authors: A
authors: A
authors: Bockisch
authors: H C
authors: HC
authors: Diener
references: Neuroimage. 2004 Nov;23(3):827-39
references: 15528083
references: Exp Brain Res. 1987;66(2):385-93
references: 3595781
references: Neuroimage. 2001 Jul;14(1 Pt 2):S142-6
references: 11373146
references: Neuroimage. 2000 Feb;11(2):124-44
references: 10679185
references: Brain. 2006 Mar;129(Pt 3):809-19
references: 16421171
references: Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2006 Mar;20(1):24-41
references: 16467276
references: Stroke. 2001 Nov;32(11):2534-42
references: 11692013
references: Brain. 2003 Nov;126(Pt 11):2476-96
references: 12937084
references: Ann Neurol. 1999 Dec;46(6):901-9
references: 10589543
references: Stroke. 1989 Jul;20(7):864-70
references: 2749846
references: Ann Neurol. 2009 May;65(5):596-602
references: 19479972
references: Neurology. 2010 Jan 26;74(4):280-7
references: 20101033
references: Neuroreport. 1998 Aug 24;9(12):2865-8
references: 9760136
references: Neuroimage. 2003 Nov;20 Suppl 1:S89-100
references: 14597301
references: Phys Ther. 1983 Oct;63(10):1606-10
references: 6622535
references: Physiother Res Int. 2000;5(1):1-18
references: 10785907
references: Neuroimage. 2010 Jan 1;49(1):9-18
references: 19716427
references: Neuroimage. 2007 Jan 1;34(1):322-31
references: 17045490
references: Neuroimage. 1996 Oct;4(2):105-10
references: 9345502
references: Neuropsychologia. 1971 Mar;9(1):97-113
references: 5146491
references: Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13-31
references: 1135616