Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Translational Stroke Research
Published in: Translational Stroke Research 4/2017

Open Access 01-08-2017 | Original Article

Spontaneous Recovery of Upper Extremity Motor Impairment After Ischemic Stroke: Implications for Stem Cell-Based Therapeutic Approaches

Authors: Hossein Delavaran, Joseph Aked, Håkan Sjunnesson, Olle Lindvall, Bo Norrving, Zaal Kokaia, Arne Lindgren

Published in: Translational Stroke Research | Issue 4/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Preclinical studies suggest that stem cell therapy (SCT) may improve sensorimotor recovery after stroke. Upper extremity motor impairment (UEMI) is common after stroke, often entailing substantial disability. To evaluate the feasibility of post-stroke UEMI as a target for SCT, we examined a selected sample of stroke patients potentially suitable for SCT, aiming to assess the frequency and recovery of UEMI, as well as its relation to activity limitations and participation restrictions. Patients aged 20–75 years with first-ever ischemic stroke, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores 1–18, underwent brain diffusion-weighted MRI within 4 days of stroke onset (n = 108). Survivors were followed up after 3–5 years, including assessment with NIHSS, Fugl-Meyer assessment of upper extremity (FMA-UE), modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and Stroke Impact Scale (SIS). UEMI was defined as NIHSS arm/hand score ≥1. UEMI recovery was evaluated with change in NIHSS arm/hand scores between baseline and follow-up. Of 97 survivors, 84 were available to follow-up. Among 76 subjects (of 84) without recurrent stroke, 41 had UEMI at baseline of which 10 had residual UEMI at follow-up. The FMA-UE showed moderate-severe impairment in seven of 10 survivors with residual UEMI. UEMI was correlated to mRS (r s = 0.49, p < 0.001) and the SIS social participation domain (r s = −0.38, p = 0.001). Nearly 25% of the subjects with UEMI at baseline had residual impairment after 3–5 years, whereas about 75% showed complete recovery. Most of the subjects with residual UEMI had moderate-severe impairment, which correlated strongly to dependency in daily activities and social participation restrictions. Our findings suggest that SCT targeting post-stroke UEMI may be clinically valuable with significant meaningful benefits for patients but also emphasize the need of early prognostication to detect patients that will have residual impairment in order to optimize patient selection for SCT.
Literature
1.
Lindvall O, Kokaia Z. Stem cell research in stroke: how far from the clinic? Stroke. 2011;42:2369–75.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
4.
Savitz SI, Cramer SC, Wechsler L, STEPS 3 Consortium. Stem cells as an emerging paradigm in stroke 3: enhancing the development of clinical trials. Stroke. 2014;45:634–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Kalladka D, Sinden J, Pollock K, Haig C, McLean J, Smith W, et al. Human neural stem cells in patients with chronic ischaemic stroke (PISCES): a phase 1, first-in-man study. Lancet. 2016;388:787–96.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Steinberg GK, Kondziolka D, Wechsler LR, Lunsford LD, Coburn ML, Billigen JB, et al. Clinical outcomes of transplanted modified bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in stroke: a phase 1/2a study. Stroke. 2016;47:1817–24.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Prabhakaran S, Zarahn E, Riley C, Speizer A, Chong JY, Lazar RM, et al. Inter-individual variability in the capacity for motor recovery after ischemic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:64–71.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Cramer SC, Koroshetz WJ, Finklestein SP. The case for modality-specific outcome measures in clinical trials of stroke recovery-promoting agents. Stroke. 2007;38:1393–5.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Oki K, Tatarishvili J, Wood J, Koch P, Wattananit S, Mine Y, et al. Human-induced pluripotent stem cells form functional neurons and improve recovery after grafting in stroke-damaged brain. Stem Cells. 2012;30:1120–33.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Tornero D, Wattananit S, Grønning Madsen M, Koch P, Wood J, Tatarishvili J, et al. Human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cortical neurons integrate in stroke-injured cortex and improve functional recovery. Brain. 2013;136:3561–77.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Hicks AU, Lappalainen RS, Narkilahti S, Suuronen R, Corbett D, Sivenius J, et al. Transplantation of human embryonic stem cell-derived neural precursor cells and enriched environment after cortical stroke in rats: cell survival and functional recovery. Eur J Neurosci. 2009;29:562–74.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Daadi MM, Maag AL, Steinberg GK. Adherent self-renewable human embryonic stem cell-derived neural stem cell line: functional engraftment in experimental stroke model. PLoS One. 2008;3(2):e1644.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:741–54.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Patel AT, Duncan PW, Lai SM, Studenski S. The relation between impairments and functional outcomes poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:1357–63.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Veerbeek JM, Kwakkel G, van Wegen EE, Ket JC, Heymans MW. Early prediction of outcome of activities of daily living after stroke: a systematic review. Stroke. 2011;42:1482–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Murphy M, Resteghini C, Feys P, Lamers I. An overview of systematic reviews on upper extremity outcome measures after stroke. BMC Neurol. 2015;15:29.CrossRef
17.
WHO MONICA Project Principal Investigators. The World Health Organization MONICA Project (monitoring trends and determinants in cardiovascular disease): a major international collaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41:105–14.CrossRef
18.
Brott T, Adams Jr HP, Olinger CP, Marler JR, Barsan WG, Biller J, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke. 1989;20:864–70.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Delavaran H, Sjunnesson H, Arvidsson A, Lindvall O, Norrving B, van Westen D, et al. Proximity of brain infarcts to regions of endogenous neurogenesis and involvement of striatum in ischaemic stroke. Eur J Neurol. 2013;20:473–9.CrossRefPubMed
20.
WHO. International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva: WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data; 2001.
21.
Wityk RJ, Pessin MS, Kaplan RF, Caplan LR. Serial assessment of acute stroke using the NIH Stroke Scale. Stroke. 1994;25:362–5.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Anemaet WK. Using standardized measures to meet the challenge of stroke assessment. Top Geriatr Rehabil. 2002;18:47–62.CrossRef
23.
Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääskö L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13–31.PubMed
24.
Woodbury ML, Velozo CA, Richards LG, Duncan PW. Rasch analysis staging methodology to classify upper extremity movement impairment after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:1527–33.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hoonhorst MH, Nijland RH, van den Berg JS, Emmelot CH, Kollen BJ, Kwakkel G. How do Fugl-Meyer arm motor scores relate to dexterity according to the action research arm test at 6 months poststroke? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:1845–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, Schouten HJ, van Gijn J. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 1988;19:604–7.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res. 1981;4:483–92.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Yozbatiran N, Der-Yeghiaian L, Cramer SC. A standardized approach to performing the action research arm test. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:78–89.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30:2131–40.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Ware Jr JE. The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey—I. Evaluation of data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability and construct validity across general populations in Sweden. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:1349–58.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Yamada K, Kizu O, Kubota T, Ito H, Matsushima S, Oouchi H, et al. The pyramidal tract has a predictable course through the centrum semiovale: a diffusion-tensor based tractography study. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26:519–24.CrossRefPubMed
32.
33.
Grönholm EO, Roll MC, Horne MA, Sundgren PC, Lindgren AG. Predominance of caudate nucleus lesions in acute ischaemic stroke patients with impairment in language and speech. Eur J Neurol. 2016;23:148–53.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Nakayama H, Jørgensen HS, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:394–8.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Lawrence ES, Coshall C, Dundas R, Stewart J, Rudd AG, Howard R, et al. Estimates of the prevalence of acute stroke impairments and disability in a multiethnic population. Stroke. 2001;32:1279–84.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Wade DT, Hewer RL. Motor loss and swallowing difficulty after stroke: frequency, recovery, and prognosis. Acta Neurol Scand. 1987;76:50–4.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Persson HC, Parziali M, Danielsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. Outcome and upper extremity function within 72 hours after first occasion of stroke in an unselected population at a stroke unit. A part of the SALGOT study. BMC Neurol. 2012;12:162.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. Mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol. 2008;63:272–87.CrossRefPubMed
39.
40.
Stinear CM, Byblow WD, Ward SH. An update on predicting motor recovery after stroke. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2014;57:489–98.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Lindenberg R, Renga V, Zhu LL, Betzler F, Alsop D, Schlaug G. Structural integrity of corticospinal motor fibers predicts motor impairment in chronic stroke. Neurology. 2010;74:280–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
42.
Zhu LL, Lindenberg R, Alexander MP, Schlaug G. Lesion load of the corticospinal tract predicts motor impairment in chronic stroke. Stroke. 2010;41:910–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
44.
45.
Schwartz CE, Andresen EM, Nosek MA, Krahn GL, RRTC Expert Panel on Health Status Measurement. Response shift theory: important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88:529–36.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Jönsson AC, Delavaran H, Iwarsson S, Ståhl A, Norrving B, Lindgren A. Functional status and patient-reported outcome 10 years after stroke: the Lund Stroke Register. Stroke. 2014;45:1784–90.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Persson HC, Danielsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. A cross sectional study of upper extremity strength ten days after a stroke; relationship between patient-reported and objective measures. BMC Neurol. 2015;15:178.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Stinear CM, Barber PA, Petoe M, Anwar S, Byblow WD. The PREP algorithm predicts potential for upper limb recovery after stroke. Brain. 2012;135:2527–35.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Persson HC, Alt Murphy M, Danielsson A, Lundgren-Nilsson Å, Sunnerhagen KS. A cohort study investigating a simple, early assessment to predict upper extremity function after stroke—a part of the SALGOT study. BMC Neurol. 2015;15:92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Lyden P, Lu M, Jackson C, Marler J, Kothari R, Brott T, et al. Underlying structure of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: results of a factor analysis. NINDS tPA Stroke Trial Investigators. Stroke. 1999;30:2347–54.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Spontaneous Recovery of Upper Extremity Motor Impairment After Ischemic Stroke: Implications for Stem Cell-Based Therapeutic Approaches
Authors
Hossein Delavaran
Joseph Aked
Håkan Sjunnesson
Olle Lindvall
Bo Norrving
Zaal Kokaia
Arne Lindgren
Publication date
01-08-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Translational Stroke Research / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1868-4483
Electronic ISSN: 1868-601X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12975-017-0523-9

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Translational Stroke Research 4/2017 Go to the issue

Opinion Paper

The High Cost of Stroke and Stroke Cytoprotection Research

Original Article

MiR-126 Affects Brain-Heart Interaction after Cerebral Ischemic Stroke

Original Article

Simvastatin Promotes Hematoma Absorption and Reduces Hydrocephalus Following Intraventricular Hemorrhage in Part by Upregulating CD36

Original Article

Preclinical Development of a Prophylactic Neuroprotective Therapy for the Preventive Treatment of Anticipated Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury

Short Communication

Task-Specific Motor Rehabilitation Therapy After Stroke Improves Performance in a Different Motor Task: Translational Evidence

Editorial

Translational Stroke Research Opportunities and a Strategy to Develop Effective Cytoprotection