Thalamocortical recruiting responses in sensory receiving areas in the cat

Jasper, Herbert H.; Naquet, R; King, Ellen Eva

doi:10.1016/0013-4694(55)90063-8

Cited by 143 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2) Unilateral DBS of the intact side of the thalamic centromedian-parafascicular complex can induce a very strong arousal response in VS patients. We consider that increased arousal level in VS patients is important for recovery from VS. 3,4,8,10,18,22) In contrast to VS patients, MCS patients retain some consciousness. Considering the persistence of physical limitations after recovery from VS treated by DBS, as we have already reported, 29,32) we selected cervical SCS rather than DBS, because SCS can increase CBF in the entire brain, and can induce muscle twitches, which cannot be induced by DBS, for the recovery of motor function.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Treatment of Patients in the Minimally Conscious State

Yamamoto

Katayama

Obuchi

et al. 2012

Neurol. Med. Chir.(Tokyo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Minimally conscious state (MCS) is characterized by inconsistent but clearly discernible behavioral evidence of consciousness, and can be distinguished from coma and the vegetative state (VS). Ten MCS patients were evaluated neurologically and electrophysiologically over 3 months after the onset of brain injury, and were treated by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). A flexible four-contact, cylinder electrode was inserted into the epidural space of the cervical vertebrae, and placed at the C2-C4 levels. Stimulation was applied for 5 minutes every 30 minutes during the daytime at an intensity that produced motor twitches of the upper extremities. We used 5 Hz for SCS, considering that the induced muscle twitches can be a useful functional neurorehabilitation for MCS patients. Eight of the 10 MCS patients satisfied the electrophysiological inclusion criteria, which we proposed on the basis of the results of deep brain stimulation for the treatment of patients in the VS. Seven patients recovered from MCS following SCS therapy, and were able to carry out functional interactive communication and/or demonstrate the functional use of two different objects. Cervical SCS increased cerebral blood flow (CBF) diffusely in the brain, and CBF increased by 22.2% during the stimulation period compared with CBF before stimulation in MCS patients (p º 0.0001, paired t-test). Five-Hz cervical SCS could increase CBF and induce muscle twitches of the upper extremities. This SCS therapy method may be suitable for treating MCS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Treatment of Patients in the Minimally Conscious State

Yamamoto

Katayama

Obuchi

et al. 2012

Neurol. Med. Chir.(Tokyo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The distribution pattern of superficial T-C responses in the cortices did not seem to be influenced by differences in site of stimulation within the "unspecific" thalamic nuclei, because similar results were obtained repeatedly in this study in which stimulated nuclei of the "unspecific" thalamus were more or less different in many experiments. Although the depth of anaesthesia has been presumed to affect the distribution pattern of recruiting responses (HANBERY and JASPER, 1953;JASPER et al, 1955), the level of anaesthesia was maintained in the present study so as to be most favorable to the occurrence of the responses. The present data are in agreement with those reported by STARZL and MAGOUN (1951) in the sense that the sensory areas of the cortex are excluded from the responsive zones for recruiting responses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As conceived by many investigators, most problematic is the ability of the cortical sensory areas to generate recruiting responses. Such factors as the depth of anaethesia and the sites of stimulation in the thalamus were proposed to reconcile different opinions (JASPER et al, 1955). In addition, there is the possibility that divergent data may have been obtained due to different methods of recording cortical electrical activity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Augmenting responses were reported to be induced in fairly localized areas on low-frequency repetitive stimulation of sensory pathways at any level from the medial lemniscus to the internal capsule (DEMPSEY and MORISON, 1943), while recruiting responses elicited by repetitive stimulation of the midline and intralaminar thalamic nuclei were taken to be recordable in almost all areas of the cerebral hemisphere (MoRISON and DEMPSEY, 1942). Later on, however, there emerged discrepancies among authors as to the views on the cortical distribution of recruiting responses (STARZL and MA-GOUN, 1951 ;STARZL and WHITLOCK, 1952 ;JASPER et al, 1955). The subject remains unsettled up to the present time, although it has been generally accepted that recruiting responses are less prominent or are hard to evoke in the sensory areas of the cortex.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examination of Responses Evoked in the Sensory Cortex by Thalamic Stimulation

1972

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1) Augmenting and recruiting responses in the sensory cortices were examined by means of laminar field potential analysis in the cortices. These responses were characterized and interpreted as follows : Augmenting responses are a deep thalamocortical (T-C) response followed by a superficial T-C response and recruiting responses ` are a pure form of superficial T-C response, deep and superficial T-C responses being two elementary components constituting various cortical responses induced by thalamic stimulation (see SASAKI et al., 1970). 2) Long-latency surface-negative potentials elicited in the somatosensory cortex (posterior sigmoid gyrus) by repetitive stimulation of the intralaminar thalamic nuclei were not due to recruiting responses actually generated in this area but attributable to the responses evoked in the underlying hidden cortex. Similar situations to those in the somatosensory cortex hold for "recruiting responses" recorded on the surface of the visual and auditory areas, i.e., the responses in the lateral and the ectosylvian gyri were assignable to activities generated in the underlying or neighboring hidden cortex. 3) Repetitive stimulation of the thalamic sensory relay nuclei given at a low frequency failed to evoke the augmenting response in the respective cortical sensory areas. It induced in some cases incremental responses in the sensory areas of the cortex ; the depth profiles in the cortex were not in accord with the characteristic feature of the augmenting response in the anterior sigmoid gyrus. 4) The absence of superficial T-C responses in the form of recruiting responses as well as a component of augmenting responses in the sensory cortices suggests that there is little or no thalamocortical projection system for the superficial T-C response ending in these cortices.

show abstract

“…Early animal studies implicated the CMN in cortical excitability in generalized seizures. 33,46 Anatomical as well as neurophysiological data have established the CMN as a "gatekeeper" in rhythm-generating activities, 40 and therefore as a potential target for the treatment of seizures. Empirically, chronic electrical stimulation of the CMN was first explored by Velasco and colleagues in 1987.…”

Section: Centromedian Thalamic Nucleusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disrupting abnormal electrical activity with deep brain stimulation: is epilepsy the next frontier?

Rahman

Abd-El-Barr²,

Vedam‐Mai³

et al. 2010

FOC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the tremendous success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for the treatment of movement and neuropsychiatric disorders, clinicians have begun to open up to the possible use of electrical stimulation for the treatment of patients with uncontrolled seizures. This process has resulted in the discovery of a wide array of DBS targets, including the cerebellum, hypothalamus, hippocampus, basal ganglia, and various thalamic nuclei. Despite the ambiguity of the mechanism of action and the unknowns surrounding potentially ideal stimulation settings, several recent trials have empirically demonstrated reasonable efficacy in selected cases of medication-refractory seizures. These exciting results have fueled a number of studies aimed at firmly establishing DBS as an effective treatment for selected cases of intractable epilepsy, and many companies are aiming at Food and Drug Administration approval. We endeavor to review the studies in the context of the various DBS targets and their relevant circuitry for epilepsy. Based on the unfolding research, DBS has the potential to play an important role in treating refractory epilepsy. The challenge, as in movement disorders, is to assemble interdisciplinary teams to screen, implant, and follow patients, and to clarify patient selection. The future will undoubtedly be filled with optimization of targets and stimulation parameters and the development of best practices. With tailored therapeutic approaches, epilepsy patients have the potential to improve with DBS.

show abstract

Thalamocortical recruiting responses in sensory receiving areas in the cat

Cited by 143 publications

References 9 publications

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Treatment of Patients in the Minimally Conscious State

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Treatment of Patients in the Minimally Conscious State

Examination of Responses Evoked in the Sensory Cortex by Thalamic Stimulation

Disrupting abnormal electrical activity with deep brain stimulation: is epilepsy the next frontier?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About