So you did absolutely useless research? Describe a way to identify a problem, BUT DID NOTHING TO SOLVE IT! I'd fire everyone involved in this!
Early Subacute White Matter Hyperintensities and Recovery of Language After Stroke
Abstract
Background
White
matter hyperintensities (WMH) are considered to contribute to
diminished brain reserve, negatively impacting on stroke recovery. While
WMH identified in the chronic phase after stroke have been associated
with post-stroke aphasia, the contribution of premorbid WMH to the early
recovery of language across production and comprehension has not been
investigated.
Objective
To
investigate the relationship between premorbid WMH severity and
longitudinal comprehension and production outcomes in aphasia, after
controlling for stroke lesion variables.(Wrong objective; the mentors and senior researchers need to be flogged for this crapola.)
Methods
Longitudinal
behavioral data from individuals with a left-hemisphere stroke were
included at the early subacute (n = 37) and chronic (n = 28) stage.
Spoken language comprehension and production abilities were assessed at
both timepoints using word and sentence-level tasks. Magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI) was performed at the early subacute stage to derive stroke
lesion variables (volume and proportion damage to critical regions) and
WMH severity rating.
Results
The presence of severe WMH explained an additional 18% and 25% variance in early subacute (t = −3.00, p = .004) and chronic (t = −3.60, P = .001)
language comprehension abilities respectively, after controlling for
stroke lesion variables. WMH did not predict additional variance of
language production scores.
Conclusions
Subacute
clinical MRI can be used to improve prognoses of recovery of aphasia
after stroke. We demonstrate that severe early subacute WMH add to the
prediction of impaired longitudinal language recovery in comprehension,
but not production. This emphasizes the need to consider different
domains of language when investigating novel neurobiological predictors
of aphasia recovery.
Introduction
Poststroke aphasia affects approximately 25 million individuals worldwide,1 with multiple neurological, demographic, and health-related factors contributing to recovery.2,3
While some studies have succeeded in predicting almost half of the
variability in post-stroke aphasia outcomes by considering the
contribution of different lesion characteriscs,4 recovery among individuals with aphasia (IWA) remains highly variable and unpredictable.5,6 Clinicians need reliable predictors7 of residual aphasia, beside lesion characteristic, to allow them to deliver meaningful prognoses to patients and caregivers.3
In some stroke survivors, the quantifiable premorbid integrity of the
brain, “brain reserve” in the presence of neural pathology, may increase
susceptibility to more severe impairments, or to diminished recovery
potential.8 Such measures of “brain reserve” may therefore improve prediction of functional outcomes after stroke.3,9
Small vessel disease (SVD) is a common cerebrovascular pathology associated with aging and cerebrovascular risk factors10 that is typically detected in midlife and found in the majority of people over 60 years.11 After stroke, premorbid SVD burden has been shown to be associated with poorer outcomes12,13 and therefore purported as a possible index of diminished “brain reserve.”14,15 White matter hyperintensities (WMH), the most commonly assessed radiological marker of SVD burden,10 is most frequently assessed using the Fazekas scale16;
which differentiates between WMH severity (mild, moderate, severe)
within both periventricular white matter hyperintensities (PVWMH) and
deep white matter hyperintensities (DWMH). WMH are considered to be a
radiological manifestation of progressive white matter integrity loss17,18 and have been associated with poor cognitive skills,19,20 including language.21,22
Given that WMH burden likely reflects the disintegration of white
matter pathways, assumed to contribute to effectiveness of neuroplastic
recovery processes reliant on these pathways, markers of WMH severity
could be considered a surrogate measure of premorbid “brain reserve.”9
Therefore, measures of early WMH severity may explain some of the
variability observed across many cognitive domains and skills after
stroke, including language.
Whilst a detrimental role of WMH burden on language has been suggested in both elderly individuals21,22 and people with aphasia,23-25 this evidence is either limited to WMH assessed within the chronic stage of recovery,3,24-26 or limited by temporal inconsistencies in WMH and behavioral assessments.23 WMH represent a dynamic pathology that progresses over time,27 usually leading to an increase in WMH severity28 but has been shown to reduce in severity in a smaller portion of patients.29
As a result of the evolving nature of WMH lesions, the timing of WMH
assessment must be taken into consideration when used as an explanatory
variable in stroke. To this end, premorbid WMH burden is likely to be
most accurately assessed on neuroimaging acquired within the early
stages after stroke, reflecting the individual premorbid “brain reserve”
available for optimal recovery.30
To
date, 4 studies have identified an association between language
(overall aphasia severity, naming and fluency) and chronic WMH burden.3,24-26 Whilst Wilmskoetter et al25
did not find a direct relationship between overall severity of aphasia
and chronic WMH burden, they did show that PVWMH severity (using Fazekas
scale) mediated a relationship between the number of long-ranging white
matter fibers and overall aphasia severity. Basilakos et al24
also found a relationship between chronic WMH severity (again using the
Fazekas scale) and the rate of decline in language abilities in chronic
aphasia. Most recently, Johnson et al3
demonstrated, in a large sample of patients, that chronic WMH severity
(using the Fazekas scale) contributed to language outcomes, together
with many other predictors. When considering naming skills alone,
Varkanitsa et al26
found no association between naming scores and WMH in the chronic
post-stroke stage, however they did find a negative association between
participants’ response to naming therapy and both total chronic Fazekas
WMH, and DWMH scores. Finally, Wright et al23 demonstrated that both subacute WMH, as assessed by the Cardiovascular Health Study scale,31
and brain atrophy, calculated as a ratio of brain volume to
cerebrospinal fluid volume, were associated with chronic naming and
fluency deficits. Whilst Wright et al23
is the only study to date to have investigated the contributions of
subacute WMH to aphasia outcomes, an important limitation of this study
was the heterogenous timing of the neuroimaging (early subacute stage)
and behavioral (range 3-157 months post onset) data acquisition. These
inconsistencies in the timing of behavioral assessment have prevented
researchers from disentangling the effects of premorbid WMH on early
compared to chronic recovery processes.
The
neural networks underpinning the language skills required for effective
communication are likely more extensive than the networks required to
support single-word production tasks, potentially making language more
susceptible to the anatomically diffuse effects of WMH than identified
in studies investigating single word level production only.23,26
Moreover, comprehension skills may be particularly vulnerable to the
adverse effects of WMH burden given the frequently identified
association of language comprehension after stroke with both a range of
cognitive abilities,32,33 and the upregulation of domain-general cognitive neural networks.34 Given that WMH can compromise multiple domains of cognitive processing,20,35
language comprehension skills may be more vulnerable than other aspects
of language, to the adverse effects of WMH burden. A global measure of
aphasia severity that incorporates several aspects and domains of
language, as used in two previous studies,3,24
may be insufficient to identify any differential contributions across
language domains. To this end more research is required to investigate
the potential role of premorbid WMH across both production and
comprehension, using a range of levels of language processing including
single word, sentence and discourse level tasks.
To
this end, we aimed to examine the contribution of WMH assessed at an
early subacute stage (subsequently referred to as “early subacute WMH”),
a surrogate measure of premorbid brain reserve, to post-stroke aphasia
outcomes. Specifically, we examined the extent to which language
comprehension and production skills are differentially impacted by early
subacute WMH burden at two different phases of recovery (early subacute
and chronic). Given that stroke lesion volume and anatomy have been
shown to be a reasonably reliable predictor of aphasia,4,36,37
we investigated if WMH burden could explain any additional variance,
over and above stroke lesion volume and distribution, within the
language network.
No comments:
Post a Comment