Page Stephen J, Cunningham David A, Plow Ela, Blazak Brittani
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH; B.R.A.I.N. Laboratory, Columbus, OH.
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; School of Biomedical Sciences, Kent State University, Kent, OH.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Apr;96(4 Suppl):S89-93. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.09.019.
The goal of postacute neurorehabilitation is to maximize patient function, ideally by using surviving brain and central nervous system tissue when possible. However, the structures incorporated into neurorehabilitative approaches often differ from this target, which may explain why the efficacy of conventional clinical treatments targeting neurologic impairment varies widely. Noninvasive brain stimulation (eg, transcranial magnetic stimulation [TMS], transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]) offers the possibility of directly targeting brain structures to facilitate or inhibit their activity to steer neural plasticity in recovery and measure neuronal output and interactions for evaluating progress. The latest advances as stereotactic navigation and electric field modeling are enabling more precise targeting of patient's residual structures in diagnosis and therapy. Given its promise, this supplement illustrates the wide-ranging significance of TMS and tDCS in neurorehabilitation, including in stroke, pediatrics, traumatic brain injury, focal hand dystonia, neuropathic pain, and spinal cord injury. TMS and tDCS are still not widely used and remain poorly understood in neurorehabilitation. Therefore, the present supplement includes articles that highlight ready clinical application of these technologies, including their comparative diagnostic capabilities relative to neuroimaging, their therapeutic benefit, their optimal delivery, the stratification of likely responders, and the variable benefits associated with their clinical use because of interactions between pathophysiology and the innate reorganization of the patient's brain. Overall, the supplement concludes that whether provided in isolation or in combination, noninvasive brain stimulation and neurorehabilitation are synergistic in the potential to transform clinical practice.
急性后期神经康复的目标是尽可能利用存活的脑和中枢神经系统组织,使患者功能最大化。然而,神经康复方法中纳入的结构往往与这一目标不同,这或许可以解释为什么针对神经功能缺损的传统临床治疗效果差异很大。非侵入性脑刺激(如经颅磁刺激 [TMS]、经颅直流电刺激 [tDCS])提供了直接针对脑结构的可能性,以促进或抑制其活动,引导神经可塑性恢复,并测量神经元输出和相互作用以评估进展。立体定向导航和电场建模等最新进展使在诊断和治疗中更精确地针对患者的残余结构成为可能。鉴于其前景,本增刊阐述了TMS和tDCS在神经康复中的广泛意义,包括在中风、儿科、创伤性脑损伤、局灶性手部肌张力障碍、神经性疼痛和脊髓损伤中的应用。TMS和tDCS在神经康复中仍未广泛应用,人们对其了解也很少。因此,本增刊收录的文章突出了这些技术在临床中的实际应用,包括它们相对于神经影像学的比较诊断能力、治疗益处、最佳实施方式、可能有反应者的分层,以及由于病理生理学与患者大脑固有重组之间的相互作用而与其临床应用相关的不同益处。总体而言,增刊得出结论,无论是单独使用还是联合使用,非侵入性脑刺激和神经康复在改变临床实践的潜力方面具有协同作用。