Even when right is all that's left: There are still more options for recovery from aphasia.
Even when right is all that's left: There are still more options for recovery from aphasia.
复制标题
DOI:
10.1002/ana.25217
复制
发表时间:
2018-04
影响因子:
11.2
通讯作者:
Schlaug G
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Schlaug G
Two prominent hypotheses inform our current understanding of how the brain recovers speech-motor function after an insult:(1) recruitment of perilesional cortex to form a new network of regions in the affected hemisphere (the perilesional hypothesis)(Fridriksson et al., 2012; McKinnon et al., 2017),(2) engagement of homotopic regions and associated fiber tracts in the undamaged hemisphere to facilitate recovery of speech-motor function (Geranmayeh et al., 2014; Heiss and Thiel 2006; Zipse et al., 2012; Pani et al., 2016; Turkeltaub et al., 2011; Xing et al., 2016), and (3) a combination of both. This “right-shift hypothesis” is based on the neural redundancy theory that both hemispheres have the capacity to support speech-motor function (eg, Hickok and Poeppel 2004, 2007; Saur et al., 2006, 2008; Marchina et al., 2018), although the degree to which the right hemisphere becomes involved after damage to the left may differ from person to person and/or depend upon factors that are not yet fully understood. Among the potential determinants of which route is chosen and which leads to success, size and site of left-hemisphere lesions and lesion load of the arcuate fasciculus (AF) or other speech/language-relevant structures (Marchina et al., 2011; Hillis et al., 2018), may be the most important.Whether or not recruitment of the right hemisphere (a) is a sign of “incomplete recovery” or “less effective compensation”(Heiss and Thiel, 2006),(b) occurs only as a transient phenomenon during the recovery process (Saur et al., 2006), or (c) indicates use of built-in redundancy (Turkeltaub et al., 2011; Marchina et al., 2018; Ozdemir et al., 2006) to facilitate recovery in case of an insult to the left hemisphere is still a matter of debate.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
5.7
作者:
Fridriksson, Julius;Richardson, Jessica D.;Fillmore, Paul;Cai, Bo
通讯作者:
Cai, Bo
影响因子:
11.2
作者:
McKinnon ET;Fridriksson J;Glenn GR;Jensen JH;Helpern JA;Basilakos A;Rorden C;Shih AY;Spampinato MV;Bonilha L
通讯作者:
Bonilha L
影响因子:
14.5
作者:
Meinzer, Marcus;Darkow, Robert;Floeel, Agnes
通讯作者:
Floeel, Agnes
DOI:
10.1093/brain/awu163
发表时间:
2014-10
期刊:
Brain : a journal of neurology
影响因子:
--
作者:
Geranmayeh F;Brownsett SL;Wise RJ
通讯作者:
Wise RJ
影响因子:
3.7
作者:
RINGO, JL;DOTY, RW;SIMARD, PY
通讯作者:
SIMARD, PY