http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00320/full?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Neuroscience-w33-2015
- U Dinant-Godinne UCL Namur, Université Catholique de Louvain, Yvoir, Belgium
- 3Imagilys, Brussels, Belgium
- 4Faculty of Electronics and Information Technology, Institute of Radioelectronics, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland
- 5Neurology Department, Site Saint-Joseph, CHC, Liège, Belgium
- 6Neurology Department, Clinique Saint-Pierre, Ottignies, Belgium
- 7Service de Neurologie, Unité Neuro-Vasculaire, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc UCL, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
- 8Scientific Support Unit, CHU Dinant-Godinne UCL Namur, Université Catholique de Louvain, Yvoir, Belgium
- 9Louvain Bionics, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Introduction
Stroke is a devastating disorder that causes life-long upper limb hemiparesis in 30–70% of survivors (Lai et al., 2002; Kwakkel et al., 2003).
The biochemical mechanisms triggered by acute stroke (e.g., edema
resolution, inflammation, up- and down-regulation of neurotransmitters)
play a prominent role in early recovery (Kreisel et al., 2006; Carey and Seitz, 2007).
Beyond these biochemical cascades, recovery of motor function also
relies on neuroplastic reconfiguration of the cortical motor network and
its descending projections, which support transfer of impaired
functions toward undamaged areas of the brain (Feydy et al., 2002; Johansen-Berg et al., 2002; Lotze et al., 2006; Lindenberg et al., 2010; Schulz et al., 2012).
Although this neuroplastic reorganization may reflect a simple
re-routing of information flow through pre-existing, undamaged pathways,
stroke patients must learn how to recruit these neuronal resources. To
some extent, recovering from hemiparesis might be conceptualized as a
particular form of motor skill learning, in other words, learning to use
the reconfigured motor network to optimize planning, execution and
movement control of the paretic upper limb. Indeed, the idea that motor
skill learning plays a central role in post-stroke motor recovery is
becoming a major focus in neurorehabilitation (Matthews et al., 2004; Krakauer, 2006; Dipietro et al., 2012; Kitago and Krakauer, 2013).
The neural substrates of motor skill learning are
relatively well elucidated in healthy individuals. Functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI) studies demonstrated that motor skill learning
relies on a network encompassing the primary motor cortex (M1),
supplementary motor area (SMA), premotor cortex (PM), dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), cerebellum and basal ganglia (Ghilardi et al., 2000; Halsband and Lange, 2006; Debas et al., 2010; Hardwick et al., 2013).
Recently, the definition of motor skill learning has been refined to a
training-induced acquisition and improvement of motor performance (i.e.,
skills), persisting over time and characterized by a shift of the
speed/accuracy trade-off (SAT), automatisation and reduction of
performance variability (Reis et al., 2009; Dayan and Cohen, 2011; Krakauer and Mazzoni, 2011).
Using a visuomotor skill learning paradigm involving a SAT, we
demonstrated that different that different behavioral trajectories can
be observed in healthy individuals during the first stages of motor
skill learning (Lefebvre et al., 2012).
The first one was characterized either by improvement in both speed and
accuracy or by improvement of one parameter without a concomitant
worsening of the other one; this resulted in a shift of the SAT, which
suggests a rapid and successful motor skill learning. The second
behavioral trajectory was characterized by opposite changes in speed and
accuracy over time, resulting in less efficient motor skill learning.
E.g., when speed improved, accuracy worsened, resulting in slight
improvement in the SAT. Finally, the third behavioral trajectory was
characterized by a deterioration of both speed and accuracy or a lack of
any improvement. According to their behavioral trajectory, the subjects
were refereed as shifters, fitters and non-learners respectively. These
different behavioral trajectories were observed despite identical
instructions and experimental conditions, and they were associated with
specific brain activation patterns. Specifically, in the efficient
shifters, activation was found in the M1, cerebellum and the SMA where
the activation changes correlated with performance improvement,
suggesting that the SMA plays a key role in early motor skill learning
involving a SAT. In the less efficient fitters, there was only a
non-significant correlation in the cerebellum (Lefebvre et al., 2012).
In stroke patients, functional brain imaging has been
used extensively to explore the reorganization of the network
controlling the paretic arm or hand. Grossly, early after stroke, this
reorganized network is characterized by compensatory recruitment of the
undamaged hemisphere, especially the motor and premotor areas (Feydy et al., 2002; Tombari et al., 2004; Jaillard et al., 2005; Ward and Frackowiak, 2006) and/or widespread activation in the damaged hemisphere with extensive activation of the somatosensory and premotor areas (Tombari et al., 2004; Ward et al., 2006). Over time, motor recovery is associated with a shift of activation back toward the damaged hemisphere (Pineiro et al., 2001; Jaillard et al., 2005; Favre et al., 2014; Grefkes and Ward, 2014) and a progressive recruitment of the cerebellum ipsilateral to the paretic hand (Small et al., 2002). In addition, changes in brain connectivity have been associated with motor function recovery after stroke (Schaechter et al., 2009; Jiang et al., 2013; Grefkes and Ward, 2014).
Early after stroke, both anatomical and functional connectivity (FC)
decrease within the damaged hemisphere; over time, motor function
recovery is associated with gradual recovery of connectivity (Pannek et al., 2009; Westlake et al., 2012; Golestani et al., 2013).
Thus, the more similar the reorganized motor network becomes to that of
healthy individuals, the better the recovery. Nevertheless, the
undamaged hemisphere may still play a vicarious role in recovered motor
control of the paretic hand (Johansen-Berg et al., 2002; Werhahn et al., 2003; Tombari et al., 2004; Lotze et al., 2006; Bestmann et al., 2010; Grefkes and Ward, 2014). It has also been suggested that the resting-state FC correlates with the motor recovery potential (Park et al., 2011, 2014; Yin et al., 2012; Golestani et al., 2013; Ovadia-Caro et al., 2013; Dacosta-Aguayo et al., 2014).
Since functional reorganization occurs in the network
supporting motor recovery of the paretic upper limb after stroke, it
seems logical that similar neuroplasticity should occur in the network
underlying motor skill learning. However, despite extensive fMRI studies
of the functional neuroanatomy of motor skill learning in healthy
individuals (Ghilardi et al., 2000; Halsband and Lange, 2006; Debas et al., 2010; Lefebvre et al., 2012; Hardwick et al., 2013),
very few studies have assessed stroke patients. Using a region of
interest (ROI) approach, one study with 10 chronic stroke patients
performing visuomotor tracking with the paretic hand showed a
bilaterally reorganized pattern with a predominance in the undamaged
hemisphere during the pre-training fMRI session (Carey et al., 2002).
After training, activation was partially transferred back toward the
damaged hemisphere, suggesting functional reorganization (Carey et al., 2002).
Another study using ROI showed decreased task-related fMRI activation
in the contralesional M1 of nine chronic stroke patients after 3 days of
training on a serial targeting task (Boyd et al., 2010).
A recent fMRI study highlighted the differences in brain activation
patterns between nine healthy individuals and nine chronic stroke
patients during training over several days on an implicit sequential
visuomotor tracking task (Meehan et al., 2011).
Compared with healthy individuals, motor skill learning and retention
in stroke patients relied on a reorganized network involving
compensatory activations, especially in prefrontal attentional areas
such as the DLPFC. Finally, during baseline performance of a sequential
grip-force tracking task, 10 chronic stroke patients showed reduced fMRI
activation in the damaged hemisphere compared with healthy controls (Bosnell et al., 2011). After repeated training, fMRI activation decreased in healthy controls but was maintained or increased in stroke patients.
These four studies involved relatively small cohorts of
mostly high-functioning patients, typically with sub-cortical strokes,
and they did not characterize motor skill learning through SAT. Instead,
they compared fMRI activation related to motor performance pre- and
post-training, and two used an ROI approach (Carey et al., 2002; Boyd et al., 2010).
Since motor learning plays a key role in motor function recovery,
better knowledge of the neurophysiology of motor skill learning after
stroke should lead to the refinement of recovery models and translate
into the development of specific neurorehabilitation methods based on
the principles of motor learning.
Motor skill learning can be divided in two stages: a
fast on-line learning process leading to large performance improvement
over a single training session (i.e., early stages of motor skill
learning as described is the present study), and a slower process
involving smaller performance gains obtained through repeated training
sessions (Dayan and Cohen, 2011).
This study aimed to specifically explore the early stages
of motor skill learning with the paretic hand in chronic hemiparetic
stroke patients, using an innovative motor skill learning paradigm with a
SAT. This is a first step to understand the “recovery process” in
stroke patients, whether residual motor learning aptitudes are present
and which brain areas are (neuroplastically?) involved. A better
knowledge about motor (skill) learning in stroke patients could help to
refine neurorehabilitation protocols, in which motor learning is often
imbedded as an implicit assumption but poorly recognized. The purposes
of this study were: (i) to use random effect (RFX) analyses of
whole-brain fMRI activation to identify the neural substrates underlying
the first stages of motor skill learning involving a SAT in a larger
cohort of chronic stroke patients using their paretic upper limb, (ii)
to determine whether shifter and fitter stroke patients recruit specific
neural substrates, and (iii) to determine whether resting-state FC
acquired before training would predict the behavioral trajectory
(shifter/fitter) during the first stage of motor skill learning and/or
correlate with the amount of motor skill learning.
More at link.
No comments:
Post a Comment