Measuring Neuroplasticity in Response to Cardiovascular Exercise in People With Stroke: A Critical Perspective.

Neurorehabilitation and neural repair Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-31 DOI:10.1177/15459683231223513
Bernat De Las Heras, Lynden Rodrigues, Jacopo Cristini, Kevin Moncion, Michelle Ploughman, Ada Tang, Joyce Fung, Marc Roig
{"title":"Measuring Neuroplasticity in Response to Cardiovascular Exercise in People With Stroke: A Critical Perspective.","authors":"Bernat De Las Heras, Lynden Rodrigues, Jacopo Cristini, Kevin Moncion, Michelle Ploughman, Ada Tang, Joyce Fung, Marc Roig","doi":"10.1177/15459683231223513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rehabilitative treatments that promote neuroplasticity are believed to improve recovery after stroke. Animal studies have shown that cardiovascular exercise (CE) promotes neuroplasticity but the effects of this intervention on the human brain and its implications for the functional recovery of patients remain unclear. The use of biomarkers has enabled the assessment of cellular and molecular events that occur in the central nervous system after brain injury. Some of these biomarkers have proven to be particularly valuable for the diagnosis of severity, prognosis of recovery, as well as for measuring the neuroplastic response to different treatments after stroke.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To provide a critical analysis on the current evidence supporting the use of neurophysiological, neuroimaging, and blood biomarkers to assess the neuroplastic response to CE in individuals poststroke.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most biomarkers used are responsive to the effects of acute and chronic CE interventions, but the response appears to be variable and is not consistently associated with functional improvements. Small sample sizes, methodological variability, incomplete information regarding patient's characteristics, inadequate standardization of training parameters, and lack of reporting of associations with functional outcomes preclude the quantification of the neuroplastic effects of CE poststroke using biomarkers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Consensus on the optimal biomarkers to monitor the neuroplastic response to CE is currently lacking. By addressing critical methodological issues, future studies could advance our understanding of the use of biomarkers to measure the impact of CE on neuroplasticity and functional recovery in patients with stroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":94158,"journal":{"name":"Neurorehabilitation and neural repair","volume":" ","pages":"303-321"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10976460/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurorehabilitation and neural repair","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683231223513","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Rehabilitative treatments that promote neuroplasticity are believed to improve recovery after stroke. Animal studies have shown that cardiovascular exercise (CE) promotes neuroplasticity but the effects of this intervention on the human brain and its implications for the functional recovery of patients remain unclear. The use of biomarkers has enabled the assessment of cellular and molecular events that occur in the central nervous system after brain injury. Some of these biomarkers have proven to be particularly valuable for the diagnosis of severity, prognosis of recovery, as well as for measuring the neuroplastic response to different treatments after stroke.

Objectives: To provide a critical analysis on the current evidence supporting the use of neurophysiological, neuroimaging, and blood biomarkers to assess the neuroplastic response to CE in individuals poststroke.

Results: Most biomarkers used are responsive to the effects of acute and chronic CE interventions, but the response appears to be variable and is not consistently associated with functional improvements. Small sample sizes, methodological variability, incomplete information regarding patient's characteristics, inadequate standardization of training parameters, and lack of reporting of associations with functional outcomes preclude the quantification of the neuroplastic effects of CE poststroke using biomarkers.

Conclusion: Consensus on the optimal biomarkers to monitor the neuroplastic response to CE is currently lacking. By addressing critical methodological issues, future studies could advance our understanding of the use of biomarkers to measure the impact of CE on neuroplasticity and functional recovery in patients with stroke.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量脑卒中患者对心血管运动的神经可塑性:关键视角。
背景:促进神经可塑性的康复治疗被认为可改善中风后的恢复。动物实验表明,心血管运动(CE)可促进神经可塑性,但这种干预对人脑的影响及其对患者功能恢复的意义仍不清楚。生物标志物的使用使人们能够评估脑损伤后中枢神经系统发生的细胞和分子事件。其中一些生物标志物已被证明对诊断中风的严重程度、预后恢复以及测量中风后对不同治疗方法的神经可塑性反应特别有价值:对目前支持使用神经生理学、神经影像学和血液生物标志物来评估中风后患者对中风后CE的神经可塑性反应的证据进行批判性分析:结果:所使用的大多数生物标志物对急性和慢性中枢神经系统干预的效果都有反应,但反应似乎不尽相同,而且与功能改善的关系也不一致。样本量小、方法多变、有关患者特征的信息不完整、训练参数标准化不足以及缺乏与功能结果相关性的报告,这些因素阻碍了使用生物标志物对中风后中枢神经电刺激的神经可塑性效应进行量化:结论:目前尚未就监测中枢神经电刺激神经可塑性反应的最佳生物标志物达成共识。通过解决关键的方法学问题,未来的研究将能推进我们对使用生物标志物测量 CE 对卒中患者神经可塑性和功能恢复的影响的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reinforcement Learning is Impaired in the Sub-acute Post-stroke Period. Post-Stroke Recovery in Relation to Parvalbumin-Positive Interneurons and Perineuronal Nets. Mapping Trajectories of Gait Recovery in Clinical Stroke Rehabilitation. Exploring Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Effects on Physical Outcomes in People With Parkinson's Disease: An Umbrella Evidence Mapping Review With Meta-analyses. Acute and Longitudinal Effects of Concussion on Reactive Balance in Collegiate Athletes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1