% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Akdeniz:282908,
author = {Akdeniz, Aslı and Ríos, Ana Sofía and Temuulen, Uchralt
and Fiebach, Jochen B and Villringer, Kersten and Ali, Huma
Fatima and Khalil, Ahmed and Grittner, Ulrike and Liman,
Thomas G. and Endres, Matthias and Kufner, Anna},
title = {{L}esion {N}etwork {M}apping of {A}cute {N}eurological
{D}eficits and {I}ts {P}rognostic {V}alue {A}fter {I}schemic
{S}troke.},
journal = {NeuroImage: Clinical},
volume = {48},
issn = {2213-1582},
address = {[Amsterdam u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier},
reportid = {DZNE-2025-01369},
pages = {103895},
year = {2025},
abstract = {Predicting functional recovery after ischemic stroke is
vital for guiding clinical care. This study investigated
whether lesion network mapping (LNM), a technique for
modeling symptom-specific brain networks, can improve
outcome prediction of functional recovery up to one-year
post-stroke.We pooled data from two prospective stroke
cohorts (1000Plus and PROSCIS-B; N = 565). Seven
NIHSS-derived symptom networks were generated using LNM
based on NIHSS sub-scores on admission (i.e., consciousness,
language, motor, sensory, vision, neglect and ataxia).
Lesion masks derived from MRI (within 7 days) were
intersected with each symptom network to calculate
individual network damage scores. Functional outcome was
defined by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months
(1000Plus) or 12 months (PROSCIS-B). Ordinal logistic
regression models were performed to evaluate additional
predictive value of LNM: Model 1 included age, lesion
volume, and presence of selected neurological deficits;
Model 2 included age, lesion volume, and NIHSS-derived
network damage scores. Models were compared using pseudo-R2
and AIC.Patients had a mean age of 68 years and a median
NIHSS of 3 (IQR 1-5). LNM revealed distinct,
symptom-specific networks, with corresponding damage scores
that were higher in patients exhibiting the respective
deficits compared to those without. However, inclusion of
these scores did not enhance the predictive accuracy of
functional outcomes beyond that achieved with clinical
variables alone (Model 1 vs. Model 2: pseudo-R2: 0.0468 vs.
0.0159; AIC:1730.598 vs. 1769.222).LNM-derived scores
reflected symptom topography but did not enhance prediction
of functional recovery. While promising as a mechanistic
tool, the clinical utility of LNM-based damage metrics for
prognostication remains limited and requires further
validation.},
keywords = {Humans / Male / Female / Ischemic Stroke: diagnostic
imaging / Ischemic Stroke: physiopathology / Ischemic
Stroke: complications / Ischemic Stroke: pathology / Aged /
Middle Aged / Prognosis / Magnetic Resonance Imaging:
methods / Recovery of Function: physiology / Nerve Net:
diagnostic imaging / Nerve Net: pathology / Nerve Net:
physiopathology / Prospective Studies / Aged, 80 and over /
Brain: diagnostic imaging / Brain: pathology / Connectome
(Other) / Functional outcome (Other) / Ischemic stroke
(Other) / Lesion-network mapping (Other) / Stroke severity
(Other)},
cin = {AG Endres},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-2719)1811005},
pnm = {353 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF4-353)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:41176879},
pmc = {pmc:PMC12621467},
doi = {10.1016/j.nicl.2025.103895},
url = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/282908},
}