Ferrari E
Department of Neurology, University of Bari, Italy.
Funct Neurol. 1991 Oct-Dec;6(4):337-58.
The aim of this paper is to discuss whether in the realm of diseases of the nervous system the concept of "dysfunctional" versus "organic" disorders is still useful. The knowledge on the Common Brain Stem System (CBSS) described by Hess is reviewed in order to underline its role as a control centre integrating all the homeostatic and adaptive nervous activities, and in this context, the nervous control of the cardiovascular system is examined, particularly in relation to higher nervous activities. The neurogenic syncopes are chosen as examples of the either "organic" or "dysfunctional" conditions whose semeiotic and pathophysiological distinctive features are analysed. In conclusion the distinction between "organic" diseases and "dysfunctional" disorders seems to be still justified, mainly for the nervous affections involving the homeostatic-adaptive properties of the CBSS.
本文旨在探讨在神经系统疾病领域，“功能失调性”与“器质性”疾病的概念是否仍然有用。回顾了赫斯所描述的关于共同脑干系统（CBSS）的知识，以强调其作为整合所有稳态和适应性神经活动的控制中心的作用，并在此背景下，研究心血管系统的神经控制，特别是与高级神经活动相关的方面。选择神经源性晕厥作为“器质性”或“功能失调性”病症的例子，分析其症状学和病理生理学的独特特征。总之，“器质性”疾病和“功能失调性”病症之间的区别似乎仍然合理，主要适用于涉及CBSS稳态适应性特性的神经疾病。
