Compares cortical activation and connectivity in stroke patients with varying hand function levels, indicating unique neural adaptations.
Objective This study aimed to compare cortical activation and functional connectivity (FC) during a thumb-to-finger opposition task in stroke patients stratified by hand function level, and to explore the modulatory role of hand dominance.Methods Fifty-two right-handed stroke patients were divided into low-function (LFG, n = 28) and high-function (HFG, n = 24) groups based on task performance. Using 49-channel functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), activation and FC were assessed in bilateral premotor/supplementary motor area (PMC&SMA), sensorimotor cortex (SMC), primary motor cortex (M1), and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Activation was analyzed via paired t-tests, FC matrices using Pearson’s correlation, and the effects of task and hand dominance via linear mixed models.Results Only the LFG showed a significant task-related increase in right DLPFC activation (q = 0.009), with a significant between-group difference (q = 0.019). FC analysis revealed stronger and more extensive connections in the HFG, particularly between M1 and PMC&SMA. In the LFG, FC significantly increased during the task (p = 0.006), and a significant task-by-hand dominance interaction was observed (p = 0.037), indicating that FC modulation depended on whether the affected hand was dominant. No such effects were found in the HFG.Conclusions Post-stroke functional level distinctly influences cortical activation and FC during fine motor tasks. Lower-function patients rely more on cognitive resources (DLPFC) and exhibit FC modulated by task demands and hand dominance, whereas higher-function patients demonstrate efficient integration within core motor networks. These findings support function-level-dependent neural reorganization and highlight the need for stratified, individualized rehabilitation strategies that consider both functional capacity and hand dominance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: