Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 16, No. 3, 2003
Issue release date: July 2003
Cerebrovasc Dis 2003;16:265–271
(DOI:10.1159/000071126)

Motor Evoked Potentials in Predicting Recovery from Upper Extremity Paralysis after Acute Stroke

Hendricks H.T. · Pasman J.W. · van Limbeek J. · Zwarts M.J.
Departments of aRehabilitation Medicine and bClinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Centre St. Radboud, and cSMK-Research, St. Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

Objective: The use of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in predicting recovery after stroke still appears to be somehow equivocal. We assessed the prognostic value of MEPs with respect to arm and hand motor recovery in acute stroke patients. Methods: This cohort study included 43 consecutive acute stroke patients with complete paralysis of the upper extremity. MEPs of the abductor digiti minimi muscle (ADM) and the biceps brachii muscle (BB) were obtained within 10 days after stroke onset. The upper limb subset of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment was used to evaluate the motor performance at regular intervals until 6 months after stroke. Results: The follow-up was complete in 40 patients (2 patients died and 1 patient had a recurrent stroke); 14 patients showed motor recovery of the arm and their mean 26-week arm motor score was 17.93 (range 3–30, SD 11.68); hand motor recovery occurred in 11 patients and their mean 26-week hand motor score was 11.09 (range 4–14, SD 4.10). Stepwise logistic regression revealed prognostic models for both arm and hand motor recovery based on BB MEPs (odds ratio 7.69, confidence interval, CI, 1.16–50.95) and ADM MEPs (odds ratio 16.20, CI 2.51–104.40), respectively. Conclusions: The predictive significance of MEPs with respect to motor recovery of the upper extremity was obvious in our homogeneous sample of patients. This agrees with the paradigm that motor recovery after infarction is strongly dependent on a critical residual sparing of the corticospinal function. In this context, the test properties of MEPs in predicting motor recovery are discussed. The added value of MEPs with respect to motor recovery of the upper extremity should be regarded as established for patients with initial paralysis, especially since clinical examination alone lacks the possibility to detect the potential for motor recovery in these cases.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Nakayama H, Jorgenson H, Raaschou H, Olsen T: Compensation in recovery of upper extremity function after stroke: The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:852–857.
  2. Hendricks HT, Van Limbeek J, Geurts A, Zwarts MJ: Motor recovery after stroke. A systematic review of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1629–1637.
  3. Taub E: Somatosensory deafferentation research with monkeys: Implications for rehabilitation medicine; in Ince LP (ed): Behavorial Psychology in Rehabilitation Medicine: Clinical Applications. Baltimore, Wiliams & Wilkins, 1980, pp 371–401.
  4. Feys H, Hetebrij J, Wilms, G, Dom R, De Weerdt W: Predicting arm recovery following stroke: Value of site of lesion. Acta Neurol Scand 2000;102:371–377.
  5. Chen C-L, Tang F-T, Chen H-C, Chung C-Y, Wong M-K: Brain lesion size and location: Effects on motor recovery and functional outcome in stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000;81:447–452.
  6. Knopmann D, Rubens A: The validity of computed tomographic scan findings for the localization of cerebral functions. The relationship between computed tomography and hemiparesis. Arch Neurol 1986;43:328–332.
  7. Heald A, Bates D, Cartlidge NE, French JM, Miller S: Longitudinal study of central motor conduction time following stroke. 2. Central motor conduction measured within 72 h after stroke as a predictor of functional outcome at 12 months. Brain 1993;116:1371–1385.
  8. Escudero JV, Sancho J, Bautista S, Escudero M, Lopez-Trigo J: Prognostic value of motor evoked potential obtained by transcranial magnetic brain stimulation in motor function recovery in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 1998;29:1854–1859.
  9. Cruz Martinez A, Tejada J, Diez Tejedor E: Motor hand recovery after stroke. Prognostic yield of early transcranial magnetic stimulation. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 1999;39:405–410.
  10. Rapisarda G, Bastings E, Maertens de Noordhout AM, Pennisi G, Delwaide PJ: Can motor recovery in stroke patients be predicted by early transcranial magnetic stimulation? Stroke 1996:27:2191–2196.
  11. Lindenstrom E, Boysen G, Waage Christiansen L, Rogvi Hansen B, Würtzen Nielsen P: Reliability of Scandinavian neurological stroke scale. Cerebrovasc Dis 1991;1:103–107.
  12. Fugl-Meyer A, Jaasko 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.
  13. Bohannon RW, Smith MB: Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther 1987;67:206–207.
  14. De Souza L, Langton Hewer R, Miller S: Assessment of recovery of arm control in hemiplegic stroke patients. Arm function test. Int Rehabil Med 1980;2:3–9.
  15. Nudo RJ, Plautz EJ, Frost SB: Role of adaptive plasticity in recovery of function after damage to the motor cortex. Muscle Nerve 2001;24:1000–1019.
  16. Duncan P, Goldstein L, Horner R, Landsman P, Samsa G, Matchar D: Similar motor recovery of upper and lower extremities after stroke. Stroke 1994;25:1181–1188.
  17. Jorgenson H, Nakayama H, Raaschou H, Vive Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen T: Outcome and time course of recovery. II. Time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995;76:406–412.
  18. Hendricks HT, Zwarts MJ, Plat FP, Van Limbeek J: Systematic review for the early prediction of motor and functional outcome after stroke by means of motor evoked potentials. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1303–1308.
  19. Hendricks HT, Hageman G, Van Limbeek J: Prediction of recovery from upper extremity paralysis after stroke by measuring evoked potentials. Scand J Rehabil Med 1997;29:155–159.
  20. Palliyath S: Role of central conduction time and motor evoked response amplitude in predicting stroke outcome. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 2000;40:315–320.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50