Murrow Richard W
Department of Neurology, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, NC , USA ; Department of Neurosurgery, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, NC , USA.
Front Neurol. 2014 Oct 20;5:213. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2014.00213. eCollection 2014.
Despite its widespread use, the precise mechanism of action of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) therapy remains unknown. The modern urgency to publish more and new data can obscure previously learned lessons by the giants who have preceded us and whose shoulders we now stand upon. Wilder Penfield extensively studied the effects of artificial electrical brain stimulation and his comments on the subject are still very relevant today. In particular, he noted two very different (and seemingly opposite) effects of stimulation within the human brain. In some structures, artificial electrical stimulation has an effect, which mimics ablation, while, in other structures, it produces a stimulatory effect on that tissue.
The hypothesis of this paper is fourfold. First, it proposes that some neural circuits are widely synchronized with other neural circuits, while some neural circuits are unsynchronized and operate independently. Second, it proposes that artificial high-frequency electrical stimulation of a synchronized neural circuit results in an ablative effect, but artificial high-frequency electrical stimulation of an unsynchronized neural circuit results in a stimulatory effect. Third, it suggests a part of the mechanism by which large-scale physiologic synchronization of widely distributed independently processed information streams may occur. This may be the neural mechanism underlying Penfield's "centrencephalic system," which he emphasized so many years ago. Fourth, it outlines the specific anatomic distribution of this physiologic synchronization, which Penfield has already clearly delineated as the distribution of his centrencephalic system.
This paper draws on a brief overview of previous theory regarding the mechanism of action of DBS and on historical, as well as widely known modern clinical data regarding the observed effects of stimulation delivered to various targets within the brain. Basic science investigations, which support the hypothesis are also cited.
This paper proposes a novel hypothesis for the mechanism of action of DBS, which was conceptually foreshadowed by Wilder Penfield decades ago.
尽管脑深部电刺激(DBS)疗法被广泛应用,但其确切的作用机制仍不明确。当下急于发表更多新数据的热潮,可能会掩盖我们之前的巨人前辈们所积累的经验教训,而我们正是站在他们的肩膀上。怀尔德·彭菲尔德广泛研究了人工电刺激大脑的效果,他对该主题的评论在今天仍然具有重要意义。特别是,他指出了人类大脑内刺激的两种截然不同(且看似相反)的效果。在某些结构中,人工电刺激产生的效果类似于切除,而在其他结构中,它对该组织产生刺激作用。
本文提出了四个假设。其一,它认为一些神经回路与其他神经回路广泛同步,而一些神经回路则不同步且独立运作。其二,它提出对同步神经回路进行人工高频电刺激会产生切除效应,而对不同步神经回路进行人工高频电刺激会产生刺激效应。其三,它提出了一种可能导致广泛分布的独立处理信息流大规模生理同步的部分机制。这可能是彭菲尔德多年前强调的“中央脑系统”背后的神经机制。其四,它概述了这种生理同步的具体解剖分布,彭菲尔德已经明确将其描绘为他的中央脑系统的分布。
本文借鉴了以往关于DBS作用机制的理论概述,以及关于大脑内不同靶点刺激效果的历史和广为人知的现代临床数据。文中还引用了支持该假设的基础科学研究。
本文提出了一种关于DBS作用机制的新假设,几十年前怀尔德·彭菲尔德在概念上就已对此有所预示。