Sensory and motor representations embedded in topographic cortical maps are use-dependent, dynamically maintained, and self-organizing functional mosaics that constitute idiosyncratic entities involved in perceptual and motor learning abilities. Studies of cortical map plasticity have substantiated the view that local reorganization of sensory and motor areas has great significance in recovery of function following brain damage or spinal cord injury. In addition, the transfer of function to distributed cortical areas and subcortical structures represents an adaptive strategy for functional compensation. There is a growing consensus that subject-environment interactions, by continuously refining the canvas of synaptic connectivity and reshaping the anatomical and functional architecture of neural circuits, promote adaptive behavior throughout life. Taking advantage of use-dependent neural plasticity, early initiated rehabilitative procedures improve the potential for recovery.
BallermannMFouadK.2006. Spontaneous locomotor recovery in spinal cord injured rats is accompanied by anatomical plasticity of reticulospinal fibers. Eur J Neurosci23:1988–96.
2.
BareyreFMKerschensteinerMRaineteauOMettenleiterTCWeinmannOSchwabME. 2004. The injured spinal cord spontaneously forms a new intraspinal circuit in adult rats. Nat Neurosci7:269–77.
3.
BrownCEAminoltejariKErbHWinshipIRMurphyTH. 2009. In vivo voltage-sensitive dye imaging in adult mice reveals that somatosensory maps lost to stroke are replaced over weeks by new structural and functional circuits with prolonged modes of activation within both the peri-infarct zone and distant sites. J Neurosci29:1719–34.
4.
BruehlmeierMDietzVLeendersKLRoelckeUMissimerJCurtA.1998. How does the human brain deal with a spinal cord injury?Eur J Neurosci10:3918–22.
5.
ButefischCMKleiserRSeitzRJ. 2006. Post-lesional cerebral reorganisation: evidence from functional neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Physiol99:437–54.
6.
CalauttiCBaronJC. 2003. Functional neuroimaging studies of motor recovery after stroke in adults: a review. Stroke34:1553–66.
7.
CalauttiCLeroyFGuincestreJYBaronJC. 2001. Dynamics of motor network overactivation after striatocapsular stroke: a longitudinal PET study using a fixed-performance paradigm. Stroke32:2534–42.
8.
CalauttiCLeroyFGuincestreJYMarieRMBaronJC. 2001. Sequential activation brain mapping after subcortical stroke: changes in hemispheric balance and recovery. Neuroreport12:3883–86.
9.
CalauttiCNaccaratoMJonesPSSharmaNDayDDCarpenterAT, and others. 2007. The relationship between motor deficit and hemisphere activation balance after stroke: a 3T fMRI study. Neuroimage34:322–31.
10.
CareyJRKimberleyTJLewisSMAuerbachEJDorseyLRundquistP, and others. 2002. Analysis of fMRI and finger tracking training in subjects with chronic stroke. Brain125:773–88.
11.
CareyLMAbbottDFEganGFO’KeefeGJJacksonGDBernhardtJ, and others. 2006. Evolution of brain activation with good and poor motor recovery after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair20:24–41.
12.
ChangCShyuBC. 2001. A fMRI study of brain activations during non-noxious and noxious electrical stimulation of the sciatic nerve of rats. Brain Res897:71–81.
13.
CholletFDiPieroVWiseRJBrooksDJDolanRJFrackowiakRS. 1991. The functional anatomy of motor recovery after stroke in humans: a study with positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol29:63–71.
14.
CourtineGSongBRoyRRZhongHHerrmannJEAoY, and others. 2008. Recovery of supraspinal control of stepping via indirect propriospinal relay connections after spinal cord injury. Nat Med14:69–74.
15.
CramerSCNellesGBensonRRKaplanJDParkerRAKwongKK, and others. 1997. A functional MRI study of subjects recovered from hemiparetic stroke. Stroke28:2518–27.
16.
CurtAAlkadhiHCrelierGRBoendermakerSHHepp-ReymondMCKolliasSS. 2002. Changes of non-affected upper limb cortical representation in paraplegic patients as assessed by fMRI. Brain125:2567–78.
17.
DancauseNBarbaySFrostSBPlautzEJChenDZoubinaEV, and others. 2005. Extensive cortical rewiring after brain injury. J Neurosci25:10167–79.
18.
DechaumontSMarquePCarelCAlbucherJFCassolECholletF, and others. 2004. Neural correlates of sensory and proprioceptive integration in the contralesional hemisphere of poor recovered patients with sub-cortical stroke: an fMRI study. Neurology62:A541, S566.005.
19.
DijkhuizenRMRenJMandevilleJBWuOOzdagFMMoskowitzMA, and others. 2001. Functional magnetic resonance imaging of reorganization in rat brain after stroke. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A98:12766–71.
20.
DongYDobkinBHCenSYWuADWinsteinCJ. 2006. Motor cortex activation during treatment may predict therapeutic gains in paretic hand function after stroke. Stroke37:1552–55.
21.
EidelbergENguyenLHDezaLD. 1986. Recovery of locomotor function after hemisection of the spinal cord in cats. Brain Res Bull16:507–15.
22.
EndoTSpengerCTominagaTBreneSOlsonL.2007. Cortical sensory map rearrangement after spinal cord injury: fMRI responses linked to Nogo signalling. Brain130:2951–61.
23.
FouadKMetzGAMerklerDDietzVSchwabME. 2000. Treadmill training in incomplete spinal cord injured rats. Behav Brain Res115:107–13.
24.
FouadKPedersenVSchwabMEBrösamleC.2001. Cervical sprouting of corticospinal fibers after thoracic spinal cord injury accompanies shifts in evoked motor responses. Curr Biol11:1766–70.
25.
FouadKTseA.2008. Adaptive changes in the injured spinal cord and their role in promoting functional recovery. Neurol Res30:17–27.
26.
FridmanEAHanakawaTChungMHummelFLeiguardaRCCohenLG. 2004. Reorganization of the human ipsilesional premotor cortex after stroke. Brain127:747–58.
27.
FrostSBBarbaySFrielKMPlautzEJNudoRJ. 2003. Reorganization of remote cortical regions after ischemic brain injury: a potential substrate for stroke recovery. J Neurophysiol89:3205–14.
28.
FujiiYNakadaT.2003. Cortical reorganization in patients with subcortical hemiparesis: neural mechanisms of functional recovery and prognostic implication. J Neurosurg98:64–73.
29.
GauthierLVTaubEMarkVWPerkinsCUswatteG.2009. Improvement after constraint-induced movement therapy is independent of infarct location in chronic stroke patients. Stroke40:2468–72.
30.
GhoshASydekumEHaissFPeduzziSZornerBSchneiderR, and others. 2009. Functional and anatomical reorganization of the sensory-motor cortex after incomplete spinal cord injury in adult rats. J Neurosci29:12210–19.
31.
GieslerGJMenetreyDGuilbaudGBessonJM. 1976. Lumbar cord neurons at the origin of the spinothalamic tract in the rat. Brain Res118:320–24.
32.
GirgisJMerrettDKirklandSMetzGAVergeVFouadK.2007. Reaching training in rats with spinal cord injury promotes plasticity and task specific recovery. Brain130: 2993–3003.
33.
GleesPColeJ.1950. Recovery of skilled motor functions after small repeated lesions in motor cortex in macaque. J Neurophysiol13:137–48.
34.
GlobusARosenzweigMRBennettELDiamondMC. 1973. Effects of differential experience on dendritic spine counts in rat cerebral cortex. J Comp Physiol Psychol82:175–81.
35.
GrassoRIvanenkoYPZagoMMolinariMScivolettoGLacquanitiF.2004. Recovery of forward stepping in spinal cord injured patients does not transfer to untrained backward stepping. Exp Brain Res157:377–82.
36.
GulinoRDimartinoMCasabonaALombardoSAPerciavalleV.2007. Synaptic plasticity modulates the spontaneous recovery of locomotion after spinal cord hemisection. Neurosci Res57:148–56.
37.
HamzeiFLiepertJDettmersCWeillerCRijntjesM.2006. Two different reorganization patterns after rehabilitative therapy: an exploratory study with fMRI and TMS. Neuroimage31:710–20.
38.
HoltmaatASvobodaK.2009. Experience-dependent structural synaptic plasticity in the mammalian brain. Nat Rev Neurosci10:647–58.
39.
HummJLKozlowskiDABlandSTJamesDCSchallertT.1999. Use-dependent exaggeration of brain injury: is glutamate involved?Exp Neurol157:349–58.
40.
HummJLKozlowskiDAJamesDCGottsJESchallertT.1998. Use-dependent exacerbation of brain damage occurs during an early post-lesion vulnerable period. Brain Res783:286–92.
41.
HuntleyGW. 1997. Correlation between patterns of horizontal connectivity and the extent of short-term representational plasticity in rat motor cortex. Cereb Cortex7:143–56.
42.
JacksonABDijkersMDevivoMJPoczatekRB. 2004. A demographic profile of new traumatic spinal cord injuries: change and stability over 30 years. Arch Phys Med Rehabil85:1740–48.
43.
JaillardAMartinCDGaramboisKLebasJFHommelM.2005. Vicarious function within the human primary motor cortex? A longitudinal fMRI stroke study. Brain128: 1122–38.
44.
JainNCataniaKCKaasJH. 1997. Deactivation and reactivation of somatosensory cortex after dorsal spinal cord injury. Nature386:495–8.
45.
JainNFlorenceSLKaasJH. 1995. Limits on plasticity in somatosensory cortex of adult rats: hindlimb cortex is not reactivated after dorsal column section. J Neurophysiol73: 1537–46.
46.
JainNFlorenceSLQiHXKaasJH. 2000. Growth of new brainstem connections in adult monkeys with massive sensory loss. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A97:5546–50.
47.
JenkinsWMMerzenichMMOchsMTAllardTGuic-RoblesE.1990. Functional reorganization of primary somatosensory cortex in adult owl monkeys after behaviorally controlled tactile stimulation. J Neurophysiol63:82–104.
48.
Johansen-BergHDawesHGuyCSmithSMWadeDTMatthewsPM. 2002. Correlation between motor improvements and altered fMRI activity after rehabilitative therapy. Brain125:2731–42.
49.
KaasJHQiHXBurishMJGharbawieOAOniferSMMasseyJM. 2008. Cortical and subcortical plasticity in the brains of humans, primates, and rats after damage to sensory afferents in the dorsal columns of the spinal cord. Exp Neurol209:407–16.
50.
KimBGDaiHNMcAteeMBregmanBS. 2008. Modulation of dendritic spine remodeling in the motor cortex following spinal cord injury: effects of environmental enrichment and combinatorial treatment with transplants and neurotrophin-3. J Comp Neurol508:473–86.
51.
KimBGDaiHNMcAteeMViciniSBregmanBS. 2006. Remodeling of synaptic structures in the motor cortex following spinal cord injury. Exp Neurol198:401–15.
52.
KimberleyTJLewisSMAuerbachEJDorseyLLLojovichJMCareyJR.2004. Electrical stimulation driving functional improvements and cortical changes in subjects with stroke. Exp Brain Res154:450–60.
53.
KoopmansGCBransMGomez-PinillaFDuisSGispenWHTorres-AlemanI, and others. 2006. Circulating insulin-like growth factor I and functional recovery from spinal cord injury under enriched housing conditions. Eur J Neurosci23:1035–46.
54.
KozlowskiDAJamesDCSchallertT.1996. Use-dependent exaggeration of neuronal injury after unilateral sensorimotor cortex lesions. J Neurosci16:4776–86.
55.
KuhnkeNJuengerHWaltherMBerweckSMallVStaudtM.2008. Do patients with congenital hemiparesis and ipsilateral corticospinal projections respond differently to constraint-induced movement therapy?Dev Med Child Neurol50:898–903.
56.
Kuhtz-BuschbeckJPBoczek-FunckeAMautesANacimientoWWeinhardtC.1996. Recovery of locomotion after spinal cord hemisection: an X-ray study of the cat hindlimb. Exp Neurol137:212–24.
57.
LankhorstAJter LaakMPvan LaarTJvan MeeterenNLde GrootJCSchramaLH, and others. 2001. Effects of enriched housing on functional recovery after spinal cord contusive injury in the adult rat. J Neurotrauma18:203–15.
58.
LevereT. 1980. Recovery of function after brain damage: a theory of the behavioral deficit. Physiol Psychol8:297–308.
59.
LiepertJGraefSUhdeILeidnerOWeillerC.2000. Training-induced changes of motor cortex representations in stroke patients. Acta Neurol Scand101:321–26.
60.
LiepertJMiltnerWHBauderHSommerMDettmersCTaubE, and others. 1998. Motor cortex plasticity during constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients. Neurosci Lett250:5–8.
61.
LiljaJEndoTHofstetterCWestmanEYoungJOlsonL, and others. 2006. Blood oxygenation level–dependent visualization of synaptic relay stations of sensory pathways along the neuroaxis in response to graded sensory stimulation of a limb. J Neurosci26:6330–36.
62.
LoubinouxICarelCParienteJDechaumontSAlbucherJFMarqueP, and others. 2003. Correlation between cerebral reorganization and motor recovery after subcortical infarcts. Neuroimage20:2166–80.
63.
LoubinouxIDechaumont-PalacinSCastel-LacanalEDe BoissezonXMarquePParienteJ, and others. 2007. Prognostic value of FMRI in recovery of hand function in subcortical stroke patients. Cereb Cortex17:2980–87.
64.
MaierICBaumannKThallmairMWeinmannOSchollJSchwabME. 2008. Constraint-induced movement therapy in the adult rat after unilateral corticospinal tract injury. J Neurosci28:9386–403.
65.
MaierICSchwabME. 2006. Sprouting, regeneration and circuit formation in the injured spinal cord: factors and activity. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci361:1611–34.
66.
MarshallRSPereraGMLazarRMKrakauerJWConstantineRCDeLaPazRL. 2000. Evolution of cortical activation during recovery from corticospinal tract infarction. Stroke31:656–61.
67.
MarshallRSZarahnEAlonLMinzerBLazarRMKrakauerJW. 2009. Early imaging correlates of subsequent motor recovery after stroke. Ann Neurol65:596–602.
68.
MartinezMBrezunJMZennou-AzoguiYBarilNXerriC.2009. Sensorimotor training promotes functional recovery and somatosensory cortical map reactivation following cervical spinal cord injury. Eur J Neurosci30:2356–67.
69.
MyintJMYuenGFYuTKKngCPWongAMChowKK, and others. 2008. A study of constraint-induced movement therapy in subacute stroke patients in Hong Kong. Clin Rehabil22:112–24.
70.
NhanHBarquistKBellKEsselmanPOddersonIRCramerSC. 2004. Brain function early after stroke in relation to subsequent recovery. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab24:756–63.
71.
NishimuraYOnoeHMorichikaYPerfilievSTsukadaHIsaT.2007. Time-dependent central compensatory mechanisms of finger dexterity after spinal cord injury. Science318:1150–55.
72.
NudoRJMillikenGW. 1996. Reorganization of movement representations in primary motor cortex following focal ischemic infarcts in adult squirrel monkeys. J Neurophysiol75:2144–49.
73.
OhlssonALJohanssonBB. 1995. Environment influences functional outcome of cerebral infarction in rats. Stroke26:644–49.
74.
OniferSMZhangYPBurkeDABrooksDLDeckerJAMcClureNJ, and others. 2005. Adult rat forelimb dysfunction after dorsal cervical spinal cord injury. Exp Neurol192:25–38.
75.
RaineteauOFouadKBareyreFMSchwabME. 2002. Reorganization of descending motor tracts in the rat spinal cord. Eur J Neurosci16:1761–71.
76.
RaineteauOSchwabME. 2001. Plasticity of motor systems after incomplete spinal cord injury. Nat Rev Neurosci2: 263–73.
77.
RamanathanDConnerJMTuszynskiMH. 2006. A form of motor cortical plasticity that correlates with recovery of function after brain injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A103: 11370–75.
78.
RedeckerCWangWFritschyJMWitteOW. 2002. Widespread and long-lasting alterations in GABA(A)-receptor subtypes after focal cortical infarcts in rats: mediation by NMDA-dependent processes. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab22:1463–75.
79.
Rioult-PedottiMSFriedmanDHessGDonoghueJP. 1998. Strengthening of horizontal cortical connections following skill learning. Nat Neurosci1:230–4.
80.
RisedalAZengJJohanssonBB. 1999. Early training may exacerbate brain damage after focal brain ischemia in the rat. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab19:997–1003.
81.
RossignolSBarrièreGFrigonABarthélemyDBouyerLProvencherJ, and others. 2008. Plasticity of locomotor sensorimotor interactions after peripheral and/or spinal lesions. Brain Res Rev57:228–40.
82.
SasakiSIsaTPetterssonLGAlstermarkBNaitoKYoshimuraK, and others. 2004. Dexterous finger movements in primate without monosynaptic corticomotoneuronal excitation. J Neurophysiol92:3142–7.
83.
SawakiLButlerAJLengXWassenaarPAMohammadYMBlantonS, and others. 2008. Constraint-induced movement therapy results in increased motor map area in subjects 3 to 9 months after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair22:505–513.
84.
SchaechterJDKraftEHilliardTSDijkhuizenRMBennerTFinklesteinSP, and others. 2002. Motor recovery and cortical reorganization after constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair16:326–38.
85.
TandonSKambiNLazarLMohammedHJainN.2009. Large-scale expansion of the face representation in somatosensory areas of the lateral sulcus after spinal cord injuries in monkeys. J Neurosci29:12009–19.
86.
TattersallRTurnerB.2000. Brown-Sequard and his syndrome. Lancet356:61–3.
87.
TaubECragoJEBurgioLDGroomesTECookEWDeLucaSC, and others. 1994. An operant approach to rehabilitation medicine: overcoming learned nonuse by shaping. J Exp Anal Behav61:281–93.
88.
TaubEMillerNENovackTACookEWIIIFlemingWCNepomucenoCS, and others. 1993. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil74:347–54.
89.
TeasellRWKalraL.2005. What’s new in stroke rehabilitation: back to basics. Stroke36:215–17.
90.
TraversaRCicinelliPBassiARossiniPMBernardiG.1997. Mapping of motor cortical reorganization after stroke: a brain stimulation study with focal magnetic pulses. Stroke28:110–7.
91.
van der LeeJHWagenaarRCLankhorstGJVogelaarTWDevilleWLBouterLM. 1999. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke30:2369–75.
92.
WardNSBrownMMThompsonAJFrackowiakRS. 2004. The influence of time after stroke on brain activations during a motor task. Ann Neurol55:829–34.
93.
WardNSNewtonJMSwayneOBLeeLThompsonAJGreenwoodRJ, and others. 2006. Motor system activation after subcortical stroke depends on corticospinal system integrity. Brain129:809–19.
94.
WederBSeitzRJ. 1994. Deficient cerebral activation pattern in stroke recovery. Neuroreport5:457–60.
95.
WeidnerNNerASalimiNTuszynskiMH. 2001. Spontaneous corticospinal axonal plasticity and functional recovery after adult central nervous system injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A98:3513–8.
96.
WerhahnKJConfortoABKadomNHallettMCohenLG. 2003. Contribution of the ipsilateral motor cortex to recovery after chronic stroke. Ann Neurol54:464–72.
97.
WitteOW. 1998. Lesion-induced plasticity as a potential mechanism for recovery and rehabilitative training. Curr Opin Neurol11:655–62.
98.
WitteOWStollG.1997. Delayed and remote effects of focal cortical infarctions: secondary damage and reactive plasticity. Adv Neurol73:207–27.
99.
WolfSLLecrawDEBartonLAJannBB. 1989. Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exp Neurol104:125–32.
100.
WolfSLWinsteinCJMillerJPTaubEUswatteGMorrisD, and others. 2006. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA296: 2095–104.
101.
YusteRMajewskaAHolthoffK.2000. From form to function: calcium compartmentalization in dendritic spines. Nat Neurosci3:653–59.
102.
XerriCCoqJOMerzenichMMJenkinsWM. 1996. Experience-induced plasticity of cutaneous maps in the primary somatosensory cortex of adult monkeys and rats. J Physiol Paris90:277–87.
103.
XerriCMerzenichMMJenkinsWSantucciS.1999. Representational plasticity in cortical area 3b paralleling tactual-motor skill acquisition in adult monkeys. Cereb Cortex9:264–76.
104.
XerriCZennou-AzoguiY.2003. Influence of the postlesion environment and chronic piracetam treatment on the organization of the somatotopic map in the rat primary somatosensory cortex after focal cortical injury. Neuroscience118: 161–77.
