3.8 Article

The Prognosis and Recovery of Aphasia Related to Stroke Lesion

Journal

ANNALS OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE-ARM
Volume 40, Issue 5, Pages 786-793

Publisher

KOREAN ACAD REHABILITATION MEDICINE
DOI: 10.5535/arm.2016.40.5.786

Keywords

Stroke; Aphasia; Prognosis; Recovery

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To investigate the effects of specific brain lesions on prognosis and recovery of post-stroke aphasia, and to assess the characteristic pattern of recovery. Methods Total of 15 subjects with first-ever, left hemisphere stroke, who were right handed, and who completed language assessment using the Korean version of the Western Aphasia Battery (K-WAB) at least twice during the subacute and chronic stages of stroke, were included. The brain lesions of the participants were evaluated using MRIcron, SPM8, and Talairach Daemon software. Results Subtraction of the lesion overlap map of the participants who showed more than 30% improvement in the aphasia quotient (AQ) by the time of their chronic stage (n=9) from the lesion overlap map of those who did not show more than 30% improvement in the AQ (n=6) revealed a strong relationship with Broca's area, inferior prefrontal gyrus, premotor cortex, and a less strong relationship with Wernicke's area and superior and middle temporal gyri. The culprit lesion related to poor prognosis, after grouping the subjects according to their AQ score in the chronic stage (a cut score of 50), revealed a strong relationship with Broca's area, superior temporal gyrus, and a less strong relationship with Wernicke's area, prefrontal cortex, and inferior frontal gyrus. Conclusion Brain lesions in the Broca's area, inferior prefrontal gyrus, and premotor cortex may be related to slow recovery of aphasia in patients with left hemisphere stroke. Furthermore, involvement of Broca's area and superior temporal gyrus may be associated with poor prognosis of post-stroke aphasia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available