Neural modifications in lower limb amputation: an fMRI study on action and non-action oriented body representations

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 416-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maddalena Boccia ◽  
Antonella Di Vita ◽  
Liana Palermo ◽  
Federico Nemmi ◽  
Marco Traballesi ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liana Palermo ◽  
Antonella Di Vita ◽  
Maddalena Boccia ◽  
Federico Nemmi ◽  
Stefano Brunelli ◽  
...  

Objective. Following current model of body representations, we aimed to systematically investigate the association between brain modifications, in terms of grey matter loss, and body representation deficits, in terms of alterations of the body schema (BS) and of non-action oriented body representations (NA), in individuals with lower limb amputation (LLA). Method. BS and NA (both semantic and visuospatial NA) were evaluated in 11 healthy controls and in 14 LLA, considering the impact of clinical variables such as prosthesis use. The association between BS and NA deficits and grey matter loss was also explored in LLA by using Voxel Based Morphometry analysis. Results. LLA's performance was fine in terms of semantic NA, while it showed behavioural impairments both in BS and visuospatial NA as compared to healthy controls. Interestingly the visuospatial NA performance was related to the amount of prosthesis use. NA deficits in terms of visuospatial body map processing were associated with grey matter reduction in left (lobule VIII) and right (crus II) cerebellum, while BS deficits were associated with grey matter reduction in right anterior cingulate cortex and the bilateral cuneus. No significant association was detected for semantic NA. Conclusion. The study of BS and NA representations after limb loss has informed our understanding of the different dynamics (i.e., adjustments to body change) of such representations, supporting current cognitive models of body representation. The clinical relevance of present findings is also discussed.


BJS Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
B Gwilym ◽  
C Waldron ◽  
E Thomas-Jones ◽  
P Pallmann ◽  
R Preece ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Major Lower Limb Amputation (MLLA) is a life changing event with significant morbidity and mortality. Inaccurate risk prediction can lead to poor decision making, resulting in delay to definitive surgery, or undertaking amputation when not in the patient’s best interest. We aim to answer: In adult patients undergoing MLLA for chronic limb threatening ischaemia or diabetes, how accurately do health care professionals prospectively predict outcomes after MLLA, and how does this compare to existing prediction tools? Methods A multicentre prospective observational cohort study is being delivered through the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network. Dissemination was via an existing network of contacts and social media. Consecutive data will be collected for seven months from site launch date, including demographic data and pre-operative outcome predictions from surgeons, anaesthetists, and allied healthcare professionals. Follow-up data will comprise 30-day (mortality, morbidity, MLLA revision, surgical site infection, and blood transfusion) and 1-year (mortality, MLLA revision and ambulation). The accuracy of surgeons’ predictions will be evaluated and compared to pre-existing risk prediction scoring tools. Results PERCEIVE launched on 01/10/2020 with 23 centres (16 UK, 7 international) registered to collect data. 50 other centres (27 UK, 23 international) have expressed interest/are pursuing local audit/ethical approval. We aim to collect data on clinicians estimate of outcomes for over 500 patients. Discussion This study will utilise a trainee research network to provide data on the accuracy of healthcare professionals’ predictions of outcomes following MLLA and compare this to the utility of existing prediction tools in this patient cohort.


Spinal Cord ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 174-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Cavigelli ◽  
R Fischer ◽  
V Dietz

PLoS ONE ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e0170705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Dillon ◽  
Lauren V. Fortington ◽  
Muhammad Akram ◽  
Bircan Erbas ◽  
Friedbert Kohler

1996 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Kulkarni ◽  
C. Collin ◽  
J. Collin

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document