Baguley Ian J, Heriseanu Roxana E, Cameron Ian D, Nott Melissa T, Slewa-Younan Shameran
Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, PO Box 533, Wentworthville, NSW, 2145, Australia.
Neurocrit Care. 2008;8(2):293-300. doi: 10.1007/s12028-007-9021-3.
The management of Dysautonomia following severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains problematic, primarily due to an inadequate understanding of the pathophysiology of the condition. While the original theories inferred an epileptogenic source, there is greater support for disconnection theories in the literature. Disconnection theories suggest that Dysautonomia follows the release of one or more excitatory centres from higher centre control. Conventional disconnection theories suggest excitatory centre/s located in the upper brainstem and diencephalon drive paroxysms. Another disconnection theory, the Excitatory:Inhibitory Ratio (EIR) Model, suggests the causative brainstem/diencephalic centres are inhibitory in nature, with damage releasing excitatory spinal cord processes. Review of the available data suggests that Dysautonomia follows structural and/or functional (for example raised intracerebral pressure or neurotransmitter blockade) abnormalities, with the tendency to develop Dysautonomic paroxysms being more closely associated with mesencephalic rather than diencephalic damage. Many reports suggest that paroxysmal episodes can be triggered by environmental events and minimised by various but predictable neurotransmitter effects. This article presents a critical review of the competing theories against the available observational, clinical and neurotransmitter evidence. Following this process, it is suggested that the EIR Model more readily explains pathophysiological and treatment data compared to conventional disconnection models. In particular, the EIR Model provides an explanatory model that encompasses other acute autonomic emergency syndromes, accommodates 'triggering' of paroxysms and provides a rationale for all known medication effects.
重度创伤性脑损伤(TBI)后自主神经功能障碍的管理仍然存在问题,主要是因为对该病症的病理生理学认识不足。虽然最初的理论推断存在致痫源,但文献中对脱节理论的支持更多。脱节理论认为,自主神经功能障碍是由于一个或多个兴奋中枢从高级中枢控制中释放出来所致。传统的脱节理论认为,位于上脑干和间脑的兴奋中枢驱动发作。另一种脱节理论,即兴奋:抑制比(EIR)模型,认为致病的脑干/间脑中枢本质上是抑制性的,损伤会释放兴奋性脊髓过程。对现有数据的回顾表明,自主神经功能障碍继发于结构和/或功能(例如颅内压升高或神经递质阻断)异常,发生自主神经功能障碍性发作的倾向与中脑损伤而非间脑损伤的关系更为密切。许多报告表明,阵发性发作可由环境事件触发,并可通过各种但可预测的神经递质作用将其最小化。本文对与现有观察、临床和神经递质证据相悖的理论进行了批判性综述。经过这一过程,与传统的脱节模型相比,EIR模型似乎更能解释病理生理学和治疗数据。特别是,EIR模型提供了一个解释模型,涵盖了其他急性自主神经紧急综合征,解释了发作的“触发”机制,并为所有已知的药物作用提供了理论依据。