MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Spinal Plasticity Amplifies the Benefits of Rehabilitative Training and Improves Recovery from Stroke

2017· article· en· W2761230667 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna M Wiersma, Karim Fouad, Ian R. Winship

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsStroke (engine)NeuroplasticityCorticospinal tractMedicineForelimbSpinal cordSpontaneous recoveryStroke recoveryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceRehabilitationSpinal cord injuryPsychologyAnesthesiaMagnetic resonance imagingDiffusion MRI

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The limited recovery that occurs following stroke happens almost entirely in the first weeks postinjury. Moreover, the efficacy of rehabilitative training is limited beyond this narrow time frame. Sprouting of spared corticospinal tract axons in the contralesional spinal cord makes a significant contribution to sensorimotor recovery, but this structural plasticity is also limited to the first few weeks after stroke. Here, we tested the hypothesis that inducing plasticity in the spinal cord during chronic stroke could improve recovery from persistent sensorimotor impairment. We potentiated spinal plasticity during chronic stroke, weeks after the initial ischemic injury, in male Sprague-Dawley rats via intraspinal injections of chondroitinase ABC. Our data show that chondroitinase injections into the contralesional gray matter of the cervical spinal cord administered 28 d after stroke induced significant sprouting of corticospinal axons originating in the peri-infarct cortex. Chondroitinase ABC injection during chronic stroke without additional training resulted in moderate improvements of sensorimotor deficits. Importantly, this therapy dramatically potentiated the efficacy of rehabilitative training delivered during chronic stroke in a skilled forelimb reaching task. These novel data suggest that spinal therapy during chronic stroke can amplify the benefits of delayed rehabilitative training with the potential to reduce permanent disability in stroke survivors. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The brain and spinal cord undergo adaptive rewiring (“plasticity”) following stroke. This plasticity allows for partial functional recovery from stroke induced sensorimotor impairments. However, the plasticity that underlies recovery occurs predominantly in the first weeks following stroke, and most stroke survivors are left with permanent disability even after rehabilitation. Using animal models, our data show that removal of plasticity-inhibiting signals in the spinal cord (via intraspinal injections of the enzyme chondroitinase ABC) augments rewiring of circuits connecting the brain to the spinal cord, even weeks after stroke. Moreover, this plasticity can be harnessed by rehabilitative training to significantly promote sensorimotor recovery. Thus, intraspinal therapy may augment rehabilitative training and improve recovery even in individuals living with chronic disability due to stroke.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207