- 1Service de Physiologie Clinique, AP-HP, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France
- 2Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, CART, INSERM U965, Paris, France
Introduction
Stroke is the second leading cause of death, the second leading cause of dementia (Joray et al., 2009; Ovbiagele and Nguyen-Huynh, 2011; Roger et al., 2011)
and the first cause of morbidity in industrialized countries.
Reperfusion therapies such as thrombolysis using recombinant tissue
plasminogen activator (Hacke et al., 2008),
and more recently thrombectomy with a stent retriever, can rescue brain
tissue of the penumbra (a rim of mild to moderate ischemic tissue
around the core of the infarct), and improves the final neurological
outcome (Fransen et al., 2014). Yet, it remains accessible to less than 5–10% of the population since the therapeutic window is restricted to 6 h (Wahlgren et al., 2016).
In addition, the development of neuroprotective pharmacological
treatments to limit the neuronal loss induced by ischemia proved
disappointing when translating from experimental studies to clinical
studies (Klein et al., 1999).
The dogma, according to which, any brain injury is irreversible in
adults and cannot be repaired has long prevailed both in medical schools
and at the bedside. Yet, after a stroke, patients can improve
spontaneously within the first 3 months (Maulden et al., 2005)
and then more slowly in the following year. The first day, decreased
oedema and partial reperfusion of the ischemic penumbra may possibly
explain these phenomena, but the improvement of neurological deficit in
the following weeks suggests plasticity phenomena and brain cortical
reorganization (Chen et al., 2002).
Restoring arm and hand skill after a stroke remains challenging, even
though stroke rehabilitation programs have proven partial efficacy. Due
to the worldwide increasing number of strokes predicted for 2030 (Béjot et al., 2016),
and to the restricted number of centers able to provide reperfusion
therapies in a limited therapeutic window, there is a need to develop
new strategies that aim to enhance spontaneous cerebral plasticity. The
complication comes from that, in stroke, post-lesional brain plasticity
may be beneficial or “adaptive” or, detrimental or “maladaptive” and
thus hamper neurological recovery.
The aim of this study is not to extensively review all
the clinical studies published so far in the literature (for very
complete reviews refer to Simonetta-Moreau (2014), dedicated to stroke, or Lefaucheur et al. (2014),
about Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation [NIBS] in general neurology). The
purpose of this review is rather to propose mechanisms from clinical and
experimental data, and how up-coming clinical trials could be designed
to better address these issues.
More at link
No comments:
Post a Comment