Resting-State Functional Connectivity and Its Association With Multiple Domains of Upper-Extremity Function in Chronic Stroke

Background. Recent work has shown that resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) between homotopic, motor-related brain regions is associated with upper-extremity control early after stroke. Objectives. This study examined various patterns of rsFC in chronic stroke, a time at which extensive neural reorganization has occurred. Associations between homotopic somatomotor connectivity and clinical measures, representing separate domains of upper-extremity function, were determined. Methods. A total of 19 persons ≥6 months poststroke participated. Four connectivity patterns within a somatomotor network were quantified using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Upper-extremity gross muscle activation, control, and real-world use were evaluated with the Motricity Index, Action Research Arm Test, and accelerometry, respectively. Results. Connectivity between homotopic regions was stronger than that in the contralesional and ipsilesional hemispheres. No differences in connectivity strength were noted between homotopic pairs, indicating that a specific brain structure was not driving somatomotor network connectivity. Homotopic connectivity was significantly associated with both upper-extremity control (r = 0.53; P= .02) and real-world use (r = 0.54; P= .02); however, there was no association with gross muscle activation (r = 0.23; P=.34). The combination of clinical measures accounted for 40% of the variance in rsFC (= .05). Conclusions. The results reported here expand on previous findings, indicating that homotopic rsFC persists in chronic stroke and discriminates between varying levels of upper-extremity control and real-world use. Further work is needed to evaluate its adequacy as a biomarker of motor recovery following stroke.

[1]  P Noël,et al.  Magnetic transcranial stimulation: clinical interest of the silent period in acute and chronic stages of stroke. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[2]  Lynne V. Gauthier,et al.  Remodeling the Brain: Plastic Structural Brain Changes Produced by Different Motor Therapies After Stroke , 2008, Stroke.

[3]  Maurizio Corbetta,et al.  Why use a connectivity-based approach to study stroke and recovery of function? , 2012, NeuroImage.

[4]  Catherine E. Lang,et al.  Upper Extremity Use in People with Hemiparesis in the First Few Weeks After Stroke , 2007, Journal of neurologic physical therapy : JNPT.

[5]  Joanne M Wagner,et al.  Measurement of upper-extremity function early after stroke: properties of the action research arm test. , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[6]  C. Lang,et al.  Assessment of upper extremity impairment, function, and activity after stroke: foundations for clinical decision making. , 2013, Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists.

[7]  E. Taub,et al.  Objective measurement of functional upper-extremity movement using accelerometer recordings transformed with a threshold filter. , 2000, Stroke.

[8]  R. Guillery,et al.  The thalamus as a monitor of motor outputs. , 2002, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[9]  P. Skudlarski,et al.  Brain Connectivity Related to Working Memory Performance , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Learning sculpts the spontaneous activity of the resting human brain , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  J. Bussmann,et al.  Quantifying nonuse in chronic stroke patients: a study into paretic, nonparetic, and bimanual upper-limb use in daily life. , 2012, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[12]  J. Kleim,et al.  Motor training induces experience-specific patterns of plasticity across motor cortex and spinal cord. , 2006, Journal of applied physiology.

[13]  Richard W. Bohannon Motricity Index Scores are Valid Indicators of Paretic Upper Extremity Strength Following Stroke , 1999 .

[14]  D. Wade,et al.  Assessing motor impairment after stroke: a pilot reliability study. , 1990, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[15]  Maurizio Corbetta,et al.  Neurological Principles and Rehabilitation of Action Disorders , 2011, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[16]  W. Byblow,et al.  Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. , 2006, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[17]  Nadia Bolognini,et al.  Neurophysiological and Behavioral Effects of tDCS Combined With Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy in Poststroke Patients , 2011, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[18]  Chang-hyun Park,et al.  Transcranial direct current stimulation increases resting state interhemispheric connectivity , 2013, Neuroscience Letters.

[19]  Zhong-Lin Lu,et al.  Changes in Resting State Effective Connectivity in the Motor Network Following Rehabilitation of Upper Extremity Poststroke Paresis , 2009, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[20]  S. Page,et al.  Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[21]  Debbie Rand,et al.  Disparity Between Functional Recovery and Daily Use of the Upper and Lower Extremities During Subacute Stroke Rehabilitation , 2012, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[22]  M. Fox,et al.  Spontaneous fluctuations in brain activity observed with functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2007, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[23]  Sergio P. Rigonatti,et al.  Repeated sessions of noninvasive brain DC stimulation is associated with motor function improvement in stroke patients. , 2007, Restorative neurology and neuroscience.

[24]  C. Lang,et al.  Recovery of thumb and finger extension and its relation to grasp performance after stroke. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[25]  Wang Zhan,et al.  Group independent component analysis reveals consistent resting-state networks across multiple sessions , 2008, Brain Research.

[26]  J. Powell,et al.  Smoking, reward responsiveness, and response inhibition: tests of an incentive motivational model , 2002, Biological Psychiatry.

[27]  L. Portney,et al.  Foundations of Clinical Research , 1993 .

[28]  G. Edelman,et al.  A measure for brain complexity: relating functional segregation and integration in the nervous system. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  L. Jäncke,et al.  Effects of limb immobilization on brain plasticity , 2012, Neurology.

[30]  L. Cohen,et al.  Effects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke. , 2005, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[31]  Alan J Thompson,et al.  The relationship between brain activity and peak grip force is modulated by corticospinal system integrity after subcortical stroke , 2007, The European journal of neuroscience.

[32]  D. Bassett,et al.  The technology of accelerometry-based activity monitors: current and future. , 2005, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[33]  R. Kahn,et al.  Efficiency of Functional Brain Networks and Intellectual Performance , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Nicholas A. Ketz,et al.  Enhanced Brain Correlations during Rest Are Related to Memory for Recent Experiences , 2010, Neuron.

[35]  Catherine E Lang,et al.  Relationships and Responsiveness of Six Upper Extremity Function Tests During the First Six Months of Recovery After Stroke , 2009, Journal of neurologic physical therapy : JNPT.

[36]  G. Fink,et al.  Reorganization of cerebral networks after stroke: new insights from neuroimaging with connectivity approaches , 2011, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[37]  T. Milner,et al.  Functionally Specific Changes in Resting-State Sensorimotor Networks after Motor Learning , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[38]  W. T. Thach,et al.  Mirror Movements Complicate Interpretation of Cerebral Activation Changes during Recovery from Subcortical Infarction , 2000, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[39]  Sergio P. Rigonatti,et al.  Transcranial direct current stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients , 2005, Neuroreport.

[40]  R. Nudo Adaptive plasticity in motor cortex: implications for rehabilitation after brain injury. , 2003, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[41]  Edwin M. Robertson,et al.  The Resting Human Brain and Motor Learning , 2009, Current Biology.

[42]  G. Fink,et al.  Cortical connectivity after subcortical stroke assessed with functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2008, Annals of neurology.

[43]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Resting interhemispheric functional magnetic resonance imaging connectivity predicts performance after stroke , 2009, Annals of neurology.

[44]  Steven L. Wolf,et al.  Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Results in Increased Motor Map Area in Subjects 3 to 9 Months After Stroke , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[45]  Srikantan S. Nagarajan,et al.  Functional Connectivity in Relation to Motor Performance and Recovery After Stroke , 2011, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[46]  Carl D. Hacker,et al.  Resting state network estimation in individual subjects , 2013, NeuroImage.

[47]  M. Viergever,et al.  Recovery of Sensorimotor Function after Experimental Stroke Correlates with Restoration of Resting-State Interhemispheric Functional Connectivity , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[48]  I. Hsueh,et al.  Inter-rater reliability and validity of the action research arm test in stroke patients. , 1998, Age and ageing.

[49]  L. Cohen,et al.  Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke , 2004, Annals of neurology.

[50]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Upstream Dysfunction of Somatomotor Functional Connectivity After Corticospinal Damage in Stroke , 2012, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.