Ipsilesional anodal tDCS enhances the functional benefits of rehabilitation in patients after stroke.

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can boost the effects of motor training and facilitate plasticity in the healthy human brain. Motor rehabilitation depends on learning and plasticity, and motor learning can occur after stroke. We tested whether brain stimulation using anodal tDCS added to motor training could improve rehabilitation outcomes in patients after stroke. We performed a randomized, controlled trial in 24 patients at least 6 months after a first unilateral stroke not directly involving the primary motor cortex. Patients received either anodal tDCS (n= 11) or sham treatment (n= 13) paired with daily motor training for 9 days. We observed improvements that persisted for at least 3 months post-intervention after anodal tDCS compared to sham treatment on the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) but not on the Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer (UEFM) score. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed increased activity during movement of the affected hand in the ipsilesional motor and premotor cortex in the anodal tDCS group compared to the sham treatment group. Structural MRI revealed intervention-related increases in gray matter volume in cortical areas, including ipsilesional motor and premotor cortex after anodal tDCS but not sham treatment. The addition of ipsilesional anodal tDCS to a 9-day motor training program improved long-term clinical outcomes relative to sham treatment in patients after stroke.

Tool-use and the left hemisphere: what is lost in ideomotor apraxia?

Impaired tool related action in ideomotor apraxia is normally ascribed to loss of sensorimotor memories for habitual actions (engrams), but this account has not been tested against a hypothesis of a general deficit in representation of hand-object spatial relationships. Rapid reaching for familiar tools was compared with reaching for abstract objects in apraxic patients (N=9) and in a control group with right hemisphere posterior stroke. The apraxic patients alone showed an impairment in rotating the wrist to correctly grasp an inverted tool but not when inverting the hand to avoid a barrier and grasp an abstract object, and the severity of the impairment in tool reaching correlated with pantomime of tool-use. A second experiment with two apraxic patients tested whether barrier avoidance was simply less spatially demanding than reaching for a tool. However, the patient with damage limited to the inferior parietal lobe still showed a selective problem for tools. These results demonstrate that some apraxic patients are selectively impaired in their interaction with familiar tools, and this cannot be explained by the demands of the task on postural or spatial representation. However, traditional engram theory cannot account for associated problems with imitation of novel actions nor the absence of any correlated deficit in recognition of the methods of grasp of common tools. A revised theory is presented which follows the dorsal and ventral streams model (Milner & Goodale, 2008) and proposes preservation of motor control by the dorsal stream but impaired modulating input to it from the conceptual systems of the left temporal lobe.

Tool use and action planning in apraxia.

Apraxia after left inferior parietal lesions has been widely interpreted as evidence of damage or impaired access to representations of tool-use, but most research has investigated pantomime of tool actions, not handling of actual tools. An alternative account is that inferior parietal damage does not affect tool-use representations but impairs cognitive processing about postural and hand-tool spatial relationships which is necessary for planning and controlling any complex action. Four apraxic patients and 10 age-matched controls were asked to reach rapidly for tools or abstract objects of similar dimensions. Under conditions of time pressure and divided attention, the patients frequently failed to invert the hand to grasp inverted tools by the handle, whereas ability to invert the hand to avoid a barrier and grasp abstract objects was largely unimpaired. Frequency of errors in tool grasping correlated with severity of apraxia. When inverted tools were correctly grasped, rotation of the wrist occurred later during the reaching movement than when inverting the hand to grasp an abstract object. These data are consistent with the theory of degraded access to tool-use representations in apraxia, but this theory cannot account for co-occurring deficits in imitating or matching meaningless hand or body postures.