Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors
Objective: The adult brain’s potential for plastic reorganization is an important mechanism for the preservation and restoration of function in patients with primary glial neoplasm. Patients with recurrent brain tumors requiring multiple interventions over time present an opportunity to examine brai...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-04-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Human Neuroscience |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00118/full |
id |
doaj-a1594e51d6864e7586c60c2830c770e6 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Nina Sardesh Nina Sardesh Tavish Traut Tavish Traut Anne Findlay Anne Findlay Danielle Mizuiri Danielle Mizuiri Susanne M. Honma Susanne M. Honma Sandro M. Krieg Mitchel S. Berger Mitchel S. Berger Srikantan S. Nagarajan Srikantan S. Nagarajan Phiroz E. Tarapore Phiroz E. Tarapore |
spellingShingle |
Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Nina Sardesh Nina Sardesh Tavish Traut Tavish Traut Anne Findlay Anne Findlay Danielle Mizuiri Danielle Mizuiri Susanne M. Honma Susanne M. Honma Sandro M. Krieg Mitchel S. Berger Mitchel S. Berger Srikantan S. Nagarajan Srikantan S. Nagarajan Phiroz E. Tarapore Phiroz E. Tarapore Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors Frontiers in Human Neuroscience brain tumor magnetoencephalography motor cortex neurological surgery preoperative motor mapping plasticity |
author_facet |
Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Lucia Bulubas Nina Sardesh Nina Sardesh Tavish Traut Tavish Traut Anne Findlay Anne Findlay Danielle Mizuiri Danielle Mizuiri Susanne M. Honma Susanne M. Honma Sandro M. Krieg Mitchel S. Berger Mitchel S. Berger Srikantan S. Nagarajan Srikantan S. Nagarajan Phiroz E. Tarapore Phiroz E. Tarapore |
author_sort |
Lucia Bulubas |
title |
Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors |
title_short |
Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors |
title_full |
Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors |
title_fullStr |
Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors |
title_full_unstemmed |
Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain Tumors |
title_sort |
motor cortical network plasticity in patients with recurrent brain tumors |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience |
issn |
1662-5161 |
publishDate |
2020-04-01 |
description |
Objective: The adult brain’s potential for plastic reorganization is an important mechanism for the preservation and restoration of function in patients with primary glial neoplasm. Patients with recurrent brain tumors requiring multiple interventions over time present an opportunity to examine brain reorganization. Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is a noninvasive imaging modality that can be used for motor cortical network mapping which, when performed at regular intervals, offers insight into this process of reorganization. Utilizing MEG-based motor mapping, we sought to characterize the reorganization of motor cortical networks over time in a cohort of 78 patients with recurrent glioma.Methods: MEG-based motor cortical maps were obtained by measuring event-related desynchronization (ERD) in ß-band frequency during unilateral index finger flexion. Each patient presented at our Department at least on two occasions for tumor resection due to tumor recurrence, and MEG-based motor mapping was performed as part of preoperative assessment before each surgical resection. Whole-brain activation patterns from first to second MEG scan (obtained before first and second surgery) were compared. Additionally, we calculated distances of activation peaks, which represent the location of the primary motor cortex (MC), to determine the magnitude of movement in motor eloquent areas between the first and second MEG scan. We also explored which demographic, anatomic, and pathological factors influence these shifts.Results: The whole-brain activation motor maps showed a subtle movement of the primary MC from first to second timepoint, as was confirmed by the determination of motor activation peaks. The shift of ipsilesional MC was directly correlated with a frontal-parietal tumor location (p < 0.001), presence of motor deficits (p = 0.021), and with a longer period between MEG scans (p = 0.048). Also, a disengagement of wide areas in the contralesional (ipsilateral to finger movement) hemisphere at the second time point was observed.Conclusions: MEG imaging is a sensitive method for depicting the plasticity of the motor cortical network. Although the location of the primary MC undergoes only subtle changes, appreciable shifts can occur in the setting of a stronger and longer impairment of the tumor on the MC. The ipsilateral hemisphere may serve as a reservoir for functional recovery. |
topic |
brain tumor magnetoencephalography motor cortex neurological surgery preoperative motor mapping plasticity |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00118/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT luciabulubas motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT luciabulubas motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT luciabulubas motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT luciabulubas motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT luciabulubas motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT ninasardesh motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT ninasardesh motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT tavishtraut motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT tavishtraut motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT annefindlay motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT annefindlay motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT daniellemizuiri motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT daniellemizuiri motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT susannemhonma motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT susannemhonma motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT sandromkrieg motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT mitchelsberger motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT mitchelsberger motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT srikantansnagarajan motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT srikantansnagarajan motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT phirozetarapore motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors AT phirozetarapore motorcorticalnetworkplasticityinpatientswithrecurrentbraintumors |
_version_ |
1724912274613731328 |
spelling |
doaj-a1594e51d6864e7586c60c2830c770e62020-11-25T02:11:50ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience1662-51612020-04-011410.3389/fnhum.2020.00118510298Motor Cortical Network Plasticity in Patients With Recurrent Brain TumorsLucia Bulubas0Lucia Bulubas1Lucia Bulubas2Lucia Bulubas3Lucia Bulubas4Nina Sardesh5Nina Sardesh6Tavish Traut7Tavish Traut8Anne Findlay9Anne Findlay10Danielle Mizuiri11Danielle Mizuiri12Susanne M. Honma13Susanne M. Honma14Sandro M. Krieg15Mitchel S. Berger16Mitchel S. Berger17Srikantan S. Nagarajan18Srikantan S. Nagarajan19Phiroz E. Tarapore20Phiroz E. Tarapore21Biomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurosurgery and TUM-Neuroimaging Center, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität (TU), Munich, GermanyDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität (LMU), Munich, GermanyInternational Max Planck Research School for Translational Psychiatry (IMPRS-TP), Munich, GermanyBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurosurgery and TUM-Neuroimaging Center, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität (TU), Munich, GermanyBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesBiomagnetic Imaging Lab, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United StatesObjective: The adult brain’s potential for plastic reorganization is an important mechanism for the preservation and restoration of function in patients with primary glial neoplasm. Patients with recurrent brain tumors requiring multiple interventions over time present an opportunity to examine brain reorganization. Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is a noninvasive imaging modality that can be used for motor cortical network mapping which, when performed at regular intervals, offers insight into this process of reorganization. Utilizing MEG-based motor mapping, we sought to characterize the reorganization of motor cortical networks over time in a cohort of 78 patients with recurrent glioma.Methods: MEG-based motor cortical maps were obtained by measuring event-related desynchronization (ERD) in ß-band frequency during unilateral index finger flexion. Each patient presented at our Department at least on two occasions for tumor resection due to tumor recurrence, and MEG-based motor mapping was performed as part of preoperative assessment before each surgical resection. Whole-brain activation patterns from first to second MEG scan (obtained before first and second surgery) were compared. Additionally, we calculated distances of activation peaks, which represent the location of the primary motor cortex (MC), to determine the magnitude of movement in motor eloquent areas between the first and second MEG scan. We also explored which demographic, anatomic, and pathological factors influence these shifts.Results: The whole-brain activation motor maps showed a subtle movement of the primary MC from first to second timepoint, as was confirmed by the determination of motor activation peaks. The shift of ipsilesional MC was directly correlated with a frontal-parietal tumor location (p < 0.001), presence of motor deficits (p = 0.021), and with a longer period between MEG scans (p = 0.048). Also, a disengagement of wide areas in the contralesional (ipsilateral to finger movement) hemisphere at the second time point was observed.Conclusions: MEG imaging is a sensitive method for depicting the plasticity of the motor cortical network. Although the location of the primary MC undergoes only subtle changes, appreciable shifts can occur in the setting of a stronger and longer impairment of the tumor on the MC. The ipsilateral hemisphere may serve as a reservoir for functional recovery.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00118/fullbrain tumormagnetoencephalographymotor cortexneurological surgerypreoperative motor mappingplasticity |