4.6 Article

Facilitation of transmission in heteronymous group II pathways in spastic hemiplegic patients

期刊

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.70.1.36

关键词

muscle spasticity; hemiplegia; H reflex

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-A potent heteronymous group II excitation of quadriceps motor neurons has been recently demonstrated in normal subjects. The present study was undertaken to investigate whether this heteronymous group II excitation also contributes to spasticity in hemiplegic patients. Method-The early and late facilitations of the quadriceps H reflex elicited by a conditioning volley to the common peroneal nerve at three times motor threshold, attributed to non-monosynaptic group I and group II excitations respectively, were investigated. The comparison was drawn between results obtained in 20 patients after stroke, with hemiplegia due to a vascular lesion in the territory of the middle cerebral artery, and 20 age and sex matched normal subjects. Results-A significant increase in the group I as well as in the group II common peroneal nerve induced facilitation of the quadriceps H reflex was seen on the spastic side of the patients (group I: 159 (SEM 10)% of control H reflex; group II: 165 (SEM 8)%) compared with their unaffected side (group I: 126 (SEM 4)%; group II: 128 (SEM 5)%) (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p<0.01), or to the right (group I: 132 (SEM 4)%; group II: 131 (SEM 5)%) or left (group I: 130 (SEM 3)%; group II: 135 (SEM 6)%) side of controls (Mann-Whitney U test, p<0.01). No significant correlation (Spearman rank test) was found between the degree of group I and group If induced facilitations on the spastic side of the patients and the degree of clinically assessed spasticity (Ashworth scale). Conclusion-These results reflect a facilitation of the transmission in the interneuronal pathway coactivated by group I and group II afferents, probably resulting from a change in their descending control in spastic hemiplegic patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据