TY - JOUR
T1 - Invasive cortical stimulation to promote recovery of function after stroke
T2 - A critical appraisal
AU - Plow, Ela B.
AU - Carey, James R.
AU - Nudo, Randolph J.
AU - Pascual-Leone, Alvaro
PY - 2009/5/1
Y1 - 2009/5/1
N2 - Background and Purpose-: Residual motor deficits frequently linger after stroke. Search for newer effective strategies to promote functional recovery is ongoing. Brain stimulation, as a means of directing adaptive plasticity, is appealing. Animal studies and Phase I and II trials in humans have indicated safety, feasibility, and efficacy of combining rehabilitation and concurrent invasive cortical stimulation. However, a recent Phase III trial showed no advantage of the combination. We critically review results of various trials and discuss the factors that contributed to the distinctive result. Summary of Review-: Regarding cortical stimulation, it is important to determine the (1) location of peri-infarct representations by integrating multiple neuroanatomical and physiological techniques; (2) role of other mechanisms of stroke recovery; (3) viability of peri-infarct tissue and descending pathways; (4) lesion geometry to ensure no alteration/displacement of current density; and (5) applicability of lessons generated from noninvasive brain stimulation studies in humans. In terms of combining stimulation with rehabilitation, we should understand (1) the principle of homeostatic plasticity; (2) the effect of ongoing cortical activity and phases of learning; and (3) that subject-specific intervention may be necessary. Conclusions-: Future cortical stimulation trials should consider the factors that may have contributed to the peculiar results of the Phase III trial and address those in future study designs.
AB - Background and Purpose-: Residual motor deficits frequently linger after stroke. Search for newer effective strategies to promote functional recovery is ongoing. Brain stimulation, as a means of directing adaptive plasticity, is appealing. Animal studies and Phase I and II trials in humans have indicated safety, feasibility, and efficacy of combining rehabilitation and concurrent invasive cortical stimulation. However, a recent Phase III trial showed no advantage of the combination. We critically review results of various trials and discuss the factors that contributed to the distinctive result. Summary of Review-: Regarding cortical stimulation, it is important to determine the (1) location of peri-infarct representations by integrating multiple neuroanatomical and physiological techniques; (2) role of other mechanisms of stroke recovery; (3) viability of peri-infarct tissue and descending pathways; (4) lesion geometry to ensure no alteration/displacement of current density; and (5) applicability of lessons generated from noninvasive brain stimulation studies in humans. In terms of combining stimulation with rehabilitation, we should understand (1) the principle of homeostatic plasticity; (2) the effect of ongoing cortical activity and phases of learning; and (3) that subject-specific intervention may be necessary. Conclusions-: Future cortical stimulation trials should consider the factors that may have contributed to the peculiar results of the Phase III trial and address those in future study designs.
KW - Electrical stimulation of the brain
KW - Neuronal plasticity
KW - Recovery of function
KW - Stroke rehabilitation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=65549168180&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=65549168180&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.540823
DO - 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.540823
M3 - Review article
C2 - 19359643
AN - SCOPUS:65549168180
SN - 0039-2499
VL - 40
SP - 1926
EP - 1931
JO - Stroke
JF - Stroke
IS - 5
ER -