Search

Visual neglect after left-hemispheric lesion is thought to be less frequent, less severe, and shorter lived than visuospatial attention deficits resulting from right-hemispheric lesions. However, reports exist opposing this assumption, and it is unclear how these findings fit into the current theories of visuospatial processing. Furthermore, only little is known about the exact structure-function relationship between visuospatial attention deficits and left-hemispheric stroke. We investigated neglect in 121 patients with acute left-hemispheric ischemic stroke by following clinical development from within the first 24 h of stroke onset until hospital discharge. Visuospatial attention deficits occurred in 17.4 % (n = 21). Voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping associated visual neglect to the right with lesion in the left superior and middle temporal gyrus, temporal pole, frontal operculum, and insula. Neglect severity, captured by the Center of Cancellation Score of the Bells test, was associated with lesion in the left anterior temporal lobe and the left frontal operculum. The left-hemispheric lesion pattern of neglect thus involves areas of the ventral attention system and partly mirrors the critical regions of the right hemisphere known to be associated with neglect. Based on our prospective analysis on a large cohort of patients with left-hemispheric stroke, this study shows that in a remarkable number of patients, the left hemisphere essentially contributes to an intact representation of space and clarifies the impact of the distinct left-hemispheric structures involved in visuospatial processing.

There are a number of studies concerning difference of postural control following left or right hemisphere lesions. Few studies, however, compare the role of the right and left hemisphere in learning new postural tasks. This study aimed to address this question. Twenty patients with hemiparesis after ischemic stroke in the middle cerebral artery territory (11 with a right and 9 with a left hemispheric lesion) were investigated. All subjects were trained using two different tasks during ten training sessions. In both tasks, the subjects stood on a force platform and were taught to change the position of the center of pressure (COP) presented as a cursor on a monitor screen in front of the patient. The subjects were instructed to align the COP with the target and then move the target by shifting the COP in the indicated direction. In the "Balls" task, the position of the target (a ball) varied randomly, so the subject had to learn a general strategy of voluntary COP control. In "Bricks", the subject always had to move the target in a single direction (downward) from the top to the bottom of the screen, so that a precise postural coordination had to be learned. The number of correctly performed trials for a session was scored. The task performance and its rate were analyzed and compared with respect to the lesion lateralization between two patient groups. The voluntary control of the COP position and learning course were initially impaired in all groups of patients in both tasks. In "Balls", there were no differences between the two groups of patients. In contrast, in "Bricks", there was a greater initial deficit in patients with right hemisphere lesions, while the rate of postural learning and the final performance level did not differ between the groups. With a lower initial deficit and similar rate of learning, the maximal level of the task performance was reached earlier (on the 5th day of training) in patients with left hemisphere lesions. This group stopped improving its performance during follow-up training. The results suggest that the motor structures of the right hemisphere are more involved in the precise control of COP trajectory, but not in learning. There is no difference between hemispheres in the initial performance and learning of the general strategy of voluntary COP control. Possibly, the control of specific COP trajectory needs more sensory feedback that is associated with greater involvement of the right hemisphere. This might be a reason for the greater initial impairment of this task after lesions in the right hemisphere.

Although motor imagery is an entirely cognitive process, it shows remarkable similarity to overt movement in behavioral and physiological studies. In concordance, brain imaging studies reported shared fronto-parietal sensorimotor networks commonly engaged by both tasks. However, differences in prefrontal and parietal regions point toward additional cognitive mechanisms in the context of imagery. Within the perspective of a general dichotomization into dorsal and ventral processing streams in the brain, the question arises whether motor imagery and overt movement could differentially involve the dorsal or ventral system. Therefore, we combined fMRI and DTI data of 20 healthy subjects to analyze the anatomical characteristics of connecting fronto-parietal association pathways of imagined and overt movements. We found a dichotomy of fiber pathways into dorsal and ventral systems: the superior longitudinal fascicle (SLF II-III) was found to connect frontal and parietal regions involved in both overt and imagined movements, whereas a ventral tract via the extreme/external capsule (EmC/EC) connects cortical regions specific for motor imagery that were situated more anteriorly and posteriorly. We suppose that motor imagery-related kinesthetic emulations are embedded into dorsal sensorimotor networks, and imagery-specific cognitive functions are implemented in the ventral system. These findings have implications for models of motor cognition.