Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb 15:15:1131415.
doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2023.1131415. eCollection 2023.

Connectomics underlying motor functional outcomes in the acute period following stroke

Affiliations

Connectomics underlying motor functional outcomes in the acute period following stroke

Rong Bian et al. Front Aging Neurosci. .

Abstract

Objective: Stroke remains the number one cause of morbidity in many developing countries, and while effective neurorehabilitation strategies exist, it remains difficult to predict the individual trajectories of patients in the acute period, making personalized therapies difficult. Sophisticated and data-driven methods are necessary to identify markers of functional outcomes.

Methods: Baseline anatomical T1 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), resting-state functional MRI (rsfMRI), and diffusion weighted scans were obtained from 79 patients following stroke. Sixteen models were constructed to predict performance across six tests of motor impairment, spasticity, and activities of daily living, using either whole-brain structural or functional connectivity. Feature importance analysis was also performed to identify brain regions and networks associated with performance in each test.

Results: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.650 to 0.868. Models utilizing functional connectivity tended to have better performance than those utilizing structural connectivity. The Dorsal and Ventral Attention Networks were among the top three features in several structural and functional models, while the Language and Accessory Language Networks were most commonly implicated in structural models.

Conclusions: Our study highlights the potential of machine learning methods combined with connectivity analysis in predicting outcomes in neurorehabilitation and disentangling the neural correlates of functional impairments, though further longitudinal studies are necessary.

Keywords: attention networks; connectomic analysis; functional prediction; language networks; machine learning; motor functional outcome; stroke; structural and functional connectivity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

NM, KO, OT, IY, SD, and MS are employees of Omniscient Neurotechnology. IY, SD, and MS are also stakeholders of Omniscient Neurotechnology. XH and XZ are the employees of Xijia Medical Technology Company. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Feature importance analysis of the models classifying the Brunnstrom stage of recovery—upper extremity based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the Fugl Meyer assessment—lower extremity based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the Fugl Meyer assessment—upper extremity based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the modified Ashworth scale—lower extremity based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the modified Ashworth scale—upper extremity based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the Barthel index based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the Semans balance scale based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Feature Importance Analysis of the models classifying the functional ambulation category based on functional connectivity at the (A) individual brain region level, and (B) the network level; and based on structural connectivity at the (C) the individual brain region level, and (D) the network level. The networks contributing most to the models' classifications, based on (E) functional connectivity, and (F) structural connectivity, have also been visualized on brain models.

References

    1. Adhikari M. H., Hacker C. D., Siegel J. S., Griffa A., Hagmann P., Deco G., et al. (2017). Decreased integration and information capacity in stroke measured by whole brain models of resting state activity. Brain 140, 1068–1085. 10.1093/brain/awx021 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Albouy G., King B. R., Maquet P., Doyon J. (2013). Hippocampus and striatum: dynamics and interaction during acquisition and sleep-related motor sequence memory consolidation. Hippocampus 23, 985–1004. 10.1002/hipo.22183 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Albouy G., Sterpenich V., Balteau E., Vandewalle G., Desseilles M., Dang-Vu T., et al. (2008). Both the hippocampus and striatum are involved in consolidation of motor sequence memory. Neuron 58, 261–272. 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.02.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anderlini D., Wallis G., Marinovic W. (2019). Language as a predictor of motor recovery: the case for a more global approach to stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair. 33, 167–178. 10.1177/1545968319829454 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arya K. N., Pandian S. (2014). Inadvertent recovery in communication deficits following the upper limb mirror therapy in stroke: a case report. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 18, 566–568. 10.1016/j.jbmt.2014.02.005 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources