Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 24, 2025
Determining the Functional Status of the Corticospinal Tract Within One Week of Stroke
Published on: February 22, 2020
Does Measurement of Corticospinal Tract Involvement Add Value to Clinical Behavioral Biomarkers in Predicting Motor
Jong Youb Lim1,2, Mi-Kyoung Oh3, Jihong Park1,3
1Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080, Republic of Korea.
Background:
The prediction of motor recovery after stroke is an important issue, and various prediction models have been proposed using either clinical behavioral or neurological biomarkers. This study sought to identify the effects of clinical behavioral biomarkers combined with corticospinal tract (CST) injury measurement on the prediction of motor recovery after stroke.
Methods:
The region of interest was drawn on the normalized brain magnetic resonance imaging scans of patients with first-ever unilateral hemispheric stroke, and the degree of CST injury was calculated in a total of 67 such subjects. Patients who had initial minor deficits and showed a ceiling effect on motor recovery were excluded. To predict the follow-up Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) scores, correlation and regression analyses were performed using various clinical behavioral biomarkers, including age, sex, lesion location, and initial FMA scores and CST injury measurements.
Results:
Only the initial FMA-upper extremity (UE) score was statistically correlated with the follow-up FMA-UE score at ≥2 months after the onset (adjusted R 2 = 0.626), and the relationship between CST injury and follow-up FMA-UE score was unclear (n = 53). Hierarchical clustering between the initial and follow-up FMA-UE scores showed three clusters. After exclusion of a cluster with an initial FMA-UE ≥ 35, the prediction of the follow-up FMA-UE score was possible by incorporating the initial FMA-UE score and CST injury measurements (n = 39). However, the explanatory power decreased (adjusted R 2 = 0.445), and the unique contribution of the CST injury (10.1%) was lower than that of the initial FMA-UE score (26.7%). With respect to the FMA-lower extremity score, CST injury was not related to recovery.
Conclusions:
Motor recovery of the upper and lower extremities after stroke could be predicted using the initial FMA score. CST injury was significant for the prediction of motor recovery of the upper extremity in patients with severe initial motor deficits (FMA-UE < 35); however, its portion of prediction of motor recovery was low. The prediction of poststroke motor recovery using the initial motor deficit was not improved by the addition of CST injury measurements.
