Elsevier

Behavioural Brain Research

Volume 340, 15 March 2018, Pages 94-101
Behavioural Brain Research

Research report
Factors affecting post-stroke motor recovery: Implications on neurotherapy after brain injury

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.08.029Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Motor recovery after stroke is a multifactorial and dynamic process.

  • Advanced age, African American race, and female gender are major socioeconomic factors affecting stroke recovery.

  • Extent of initial injury after stroke is a major independent predictor of recovery.

  • Neurorehabilitation strategies provide a unique opportunity for enhancing recovery.

  • Genetic polymorphisms especially in BDNF may influence post-stroke recovery process.

Abstract

Neurological disorders are a major cause of chronic disability globally among which stroke is a leading cause of chronic disability. The advances in the medical management of stroke patients over the past decade have significantly reduced mortality, but at the same time increased numbers of disabled survivors. Unfortunately, this reduction in mortality was not paralleled by satisfactory therapeutics and rehabilitation strategies that can improve functional recovery of patients. Motor recovery after brain injury is a complex, dynamic, and multifactorial process in which an interplay among genetic, pathophysiologic, sociodemographic and therapeutic factors determines the overall recovery trajectory. Although stroke recovery is the most well-studied form of post-injury neuronal recovery, a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology and determinants affecting stroke recovery is still lacking. Understanding the different variables affecting brain recovery after stroke will not only provide an opportunity to develop therapeutic interventions but also allow for developing personalized platforms for patient stratification and prognosis. We aim to provide a narrative review of major determinants for post-stroke recovery and their implications in other forms of brain injury.

Introduction

Stroke has declined to the fifth most common cause of death in the United States after devoting extensive efforts for controlling stroke risk factors and optimizing acute care of stroke patients [1]. However, stroke remains a leading cause of disability among adults in the United States and globally [1], [2], [3]. Of the estimated 800,000 strokes that occur in the US per year, the majority of stroke survivors develop long-term functional deficits [1]. The NINDS sponsored r-tPA trials have reported that the percentage of patients that still had mild to moderate functional deficits (Modified Rankin Scale of 2–5) at 3 and 12 months after a stroke were 44% and 35%, respectively, despite the fact that they received r-tPA in the acute phase [4], [5]. Although these functional deficits may include cognitive, speech, visual, sensory and motor deficits, the most commonly recognized deficit after stroke is motor impairment that have negative impact on subject’s mobility and quality of life [5].

Functional deficits after stroke are also associated with huge financial burden on the patient, family, and society. It is estimated the average lifetime cost of caring for one stroke patient (across all stroke sub-types) was about $103,576 in 1990 which included the cost of acute care, long-term ambulatory care, and nursing home care [6]. The overall financial cost of post-stroke management of patients as well as the demand on rehabilitation therapy has also increased with the increase in numbers of stroke survivors reaching an annual total of $3.4 billion in the US [1].

Post-stroke motor recovery is a complex, dynamic, and multifactorial process in which an interplay among genetic, pathophysiologic, sociodemographic and therapeutic factors determines the overall recovery trajectory. Therefore, rehabilitation strategies that aim to improve post-stroke recovery outcomes require a thorough understanding of those major determinants. In this paper, we review the major factors influencing post-stroke motor recovery and its implication for neurotherapy after brain injury. We categorized those factors into three groups socio-demographic factors (age, gender, race, socio-economic status and others), clinical factors (the initial injury, co-morbidities, post-stroke depression and rehabilitation therapeutics), and genetic factors (Fig. 1).

Section snippets

Age

Older age is commonly identified as a significant prognostic factor for poorer outcome after ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke where nearly half of older stroke survivors experience mild-to-severe disability [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], However, the proposed prognostic value of age have been challenged by studies on long-term recovery [12], [13]. Whereas age may be an independent predictor of early outcomes after stroke [14], [15], [16], the effect of age on long-term outcome measures is less

Stroke subtype

The two major subtypes of stroke, hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke, result in different patterns of acute and chronic recovery. In general, hemorrhagic stroke patients tend to have greater functional impairment at presentation. However, patients with ICH tend to have a more pronounced and faster recovery than those with ischemic stroke of comparable severity [39], [40], [41].

The initial injury

Although several reparatory and regenerative processes occur following stroke, the extent of initial injury is a major

Genetic factors

Several studies on genetic variations in stroke and cardiovascular risk have associated multiple single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with increased risk [75], [76] or severity of ischemic stroke [77]. Yet, investigating genetic variants that may influence chronic recovery and response to rehabilitation therapy is still in infancy. Such genetic polymorphism may account for some of the inter-individual variability seen in stroke recovery, and may have implication for individualized

Conclusion

The increased number of stroke survivors creates a high demand for effective and accessible neuro-rehabilitation therapies. A thorough understanding of the pathophysiology and pattern of stroke recovery will boost the existing therapeutics and develop new rehabilitational interventions in the pipeline. Equally important is the understanding of non-pathophysiological and modifiable factors that may negatively or positively impact recovery process. Therefore, significant areas for further

Acknowledgements

Dr. Feng acknowledges grant support from National Institute of Health (P20GM109040 and HD086844), from American Heart Association (14SDG1829003 and 15SFDRN26030003) and South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Insitute (UL1 TR001450). Mr. Alawieh acknowledges grant support from the American Heart Association (15PRE25250009). Dr. Zhao acknowledge grant support from National Natural Science Foundation(81572232) and Shanghai Natural Science Foundation(13ZR1436600).

References (126)

  • B. Fritsch et al.

    Direct current stimulation promotes BDNF-dependent synaptic plasticity: potential implications for motor learning

    Neuron

    (2010)
  • M.F. Egan et al.

    The BDNF val66met polymorphism affects activity-dependent secretion of BDNF and human memory and hippocampal function

    Cell

    (2003)
  • Y. Jiang et al.

    Intranasal brain-derived neurotrophic factor protects brain from ischemic insult via modulating local inflammation in rats

    Neuroscience

    (2011)
  • P.F. Chinnery et al.

    Mitochondrial DNA haplogroups and risk of transient ischaemic attack and ischaemic stroke: a genetic association study

    Lancet Neurol.

    (2010)
  • W.H. Chang et al.

    BDNF polymorphism and differential rTMS effects on motor recovery of stroke patients

    Brain Stimul.

    (2014)
  • J.M. Hwang et al.

    Different responses to facilitatory rTMS according to BDNF genotype

    Clin. Neurophysiol.

    (2015)
  • K.E. Uhm et al.

    BDNF genotype influence the efficacy of rTMS in stroke patients

    Neurosci. Lett.

    (2015)
  • D. Mozaffarian et al.

    Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics—2016 update a report from the American Heart Association

    Circulation

    (2016)
  • A. Towfighi et al.

    Stroke declines from third to fourth leading cause of death in the United States: historical perspective and challenges ahead

    Stroke

    (2011)
  • Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. the national institute of neurological disorders and stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (1995)
  • T.N. Taylor et al.

    Lifetime cost of stroke in the United States

    Stroke

    (1996)
  • H. Nakayama et al.

    The influence of age on stroke outcome. The Copenhagen Stroke Study

    Stroke

    (1994)
  • L. Jongbloed

    Prediction of function after stroke: a critical review

    Stroke

    (1986)
  • H.S. Jorgensen et al.

    What determines good recovery in patients with the most severe strokes? The Copenhagen Stroke Study

    Stroke

    (1999)
  • S. Bagg et al.

    Effect of age on functional outcomes after stroke rehabilitation

    Stroke

    (2002)
  • J.K. Luk et al.

    Does age predict outcome in stroke rehabilitation? A study of 878 Chinese subjects

    Cerebrovasc. Dis.

    (2006)
  • O. Umeano et al.

    Gender and age interact to affect early outcome after intracerebral hemorrhage

    PLoS One

    (2013)
  • C. Weimar et al.

    Age and national institutes of health stroke scale score within 6 hours after onset are accurate predictors of outcome after cerebral ischemia development and external validation of prognostic models

    Stroke

    (2004)
  • L. Denti et al.

    Outcome predictors of rehabilitation for first stroke in the elderly

    Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med.

    (2008)
  • A. Di Carlo et al.

    Sex differences in the clinical presentation, resource use, and 3-month outcome of acute stroke in Europe: data from a multicenter multinational hospital-based registry

    Stroke

    (2003)
  • S.M. Lai et al.

    Sex differences in stroke recovery

    Prev. Chronic Dis.

    (2005)
  • J.W. Gargano et al.

    Sex differences in stroke recovery and stroke-specific quality of life: results from a statewide stroke registry

    Stroke

    (2007)
  • M. Eriksson et al.

    Self-reported depression and use of antidepressants after stroke: a national survey

    Stroke

    (2004)
  • E.L. Glader et al.

    Poststroke fatigue: a 2-year follow-up study of stroke patients in Sweden

    Stroke

    (2002)
  • L.J. Gray et al.

    Sex differences in quality of life in stroke survivors: data from the Tinzaparin in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Trial (TAIST)

    Stroke

    (2007)
  • W. Feng et al.

    Influence of age on racial disparities in stroke admission rates, hospital charges, and outcomes in South Carolina

    Stroke

    (2009)
  • S.C. Johnston et al.

    Utilization of intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator for ischemic stroke at academic medical centers: the influence of ethnicity

    Stroke

    (2001)
  • W. Feng et al.

    Risk of recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or death in hospitalized stroke patients

    Neurology

    (2010)
  • M.R. Jones et al.

    Racial variation in initial stroke severity

    Stroke

    (2000)
  • J.P. Stansbury et al.

    Ethnic disparities in stroke: epidemiology, acute care, and postacute outcomes

    Stroke

    (2005)
  • R.D. Horner et al.

    Racial variations in ischemic stroke-related physical and functional impairments

    Stroke

    (1991)
  • S. Cruz-Flores et al.

    Racial-ethnic disparities in stroke care: the American experience: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

    Stroke

    (2011)
  • H. McNaughton et al.

    Ethnicity and functional outcome after stroke

    Stroke

    (2011)
  • H. Jia et al.

    Racial and ethnic disparities in post-stroke depression detection

    Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry

    (2010)
  • J.B. Kirby et al.

    Explaining racial and ethnic differences in antidepressant use among adolescents

    Med. Care Res. Rev.

    (2010)
  • L.A. Cooper et al.

    The acceptability of treatment for depression among African-American, Hispanic, and white primary care patients

    Med. Care

    (2003)
  • R.D. Horner et al.

    Effects of race and poverty on the process and outcome of inpatient rehabilitation services among stroke patients

    Stroke

    (2003)
  • K. Putman et al.

    Effect of socioeconomic status on functional and motor recovery after stroke: a European multicentre study

    J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry

    (2007)
  • N. Hartman-Maeir et al.

    Awareness of disabilities in stroke rehabilitation—a clinical trial

    Disabil. Rehabil.

    (2003)
  • S. Paolucci et al.

    Functional outcome of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients after inpatient rehabilitation: a matched comparison

    Stroke

    (2003)
  • Cited by (99)

    • Motor Learning Following Stroke: Mechanisms of Learning and Techniques to Augment Neuroplasticity

      2024, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Authors contributed equally to this work.

    View full text