Neuroplasticity and Brain Imaging Research: Implications for Rehabilitation
Abstract
Levin HS. Neuroplasticity and brain imaging research: implications for rehabilitation.
Advanced brain imaging technologies have been used recently to investigate neuroplasticity in relation to recovery and treatment of neurologic injury and disease. The contributors to this supplement present data and synthesize the extant literature on the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, optical imaging, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcranial direct current stimulation to study remodeling of cortical representation of motor and cognitive abilities after stroke and other etiologies of neurologic impairment. In general, the collective findings of these studies support use-dependent neuroplasticity as a mechanism of recovery and response to training. Brain imaging findings support the role of training effects on increased activation of brain regions ipsilateral to unilateral vascular lesions in facilitating recovery from stroke. The articles in this supplement also report the potential therapeutic application of stimulation techniques to enhance reorganization of function.
INVESTIGATION OF NEUROPLASTICITY during the past decade has extended translational projects to rehabilitation research and led to development of new clinical interventions. Advances in noninvasive neuroimaging techniques, including functional magnetic resonance imaging, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), magnetic source imaging, and optical imaging have facilitated investigation of mechanisms mediating recovery and rehabilitation of neurologic disease and injury.
Neuroplasticity research has provided insights such as shifts over time in the relative contributions of brain regions ipsilateral and contralateral to the site of a unilateral hemispheric lesion in stroke. In contrast to the previously held concept that reorganization of function in homologous regions of the intact hemisphere facilitates recovery from stroke, we now appreciate that good functional outcome is associated with increasing participation of regions in the damaged hemisphere, including sites adjacent to the infarct. Use-dependent neuroplasticity has also gained wide acceptance in animal models, brain imaging of patients, and studies of innovative therapies such as constraint-induced movement therapy that have a foundation in laboratory research. As presented in this supplement, investigators are using neuroimaging techniques to evaluate the effects of interventions on adaptive reorganization of function. This approach has enabled investigators to compare the effects of alternative approaches to motor rehabilitation on neuroplasticity, and similar applications to training language and visual attention are in progress. Moreover, TMS and transcranial direct current stimulation have emerged as potential therapies delivered either in combination with behavioral training or in isolation, which could enhance use-dependent neuroplasticity and inhibit suboptimal reliance on the intact hemisphere. Functional electric stimulation also appears to facilitate use-dependent neuroplasticity in stroke patients with motor deficit. Relevant to the intervention studies described in the supplement is the change in cortical representation associated with practice and learning new skills in healthy subjects. Recent studies suggest that practice effects could potentially benefit cognitive function more generally and stimulate cortical remodeling.
Contributors to this supplement also show how functional brain imaging has altered current concepts of the mental activity in patients who are minimally conscious. More sensitive monitoring of changes in brain activity could lead to more accurate prognostication for recovery from devastating neurologic injury and facilitate planning for rehabilitation.
Acknowledgments
I am indebted to Steven Cramer, MD, Stephen Page, PhD, and John Whyte, MD, PhD, for co-planning this supplement and co-editing the manuscripts.
Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
Correspondence to Harvey S. Levin, PhD, Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Baylor College of Medicine, 1709 Dryden Rd, Ste 725, Houston, TX 77030
No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.