Sensory modulation in neurological rehabilitation

1,070 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,070
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sensory modulation in neurological rehabilitation

  1. 1. The sign wasn’t placed there By the Big Printer in the sky Prof. A.V. SRINIVASAN. Prof. A.V. SRINIVASAN. M.D, D.M, PhD, F.I.A.N, F.A.A.N, M.D, D.M, PhD, F.I.A.N, F.A.A.N, EMERITUS PROFESSOR OF NEUROLOGY EMERITUS PROFESSOR OF NEUROLOGYFORMER HEAD AND PROFESSOR OF NEUROLOGYFORMER HEAD AND PROFESSOR OF NEUROLOGY Institute of Neurology Chennai Chennai
  2. 2. PROF V S RAMACHANDRAN
  3. 3. Thomas Elbert Basic PrinciplesCortical representation expands linearly with use. Synchronous inputs lead to fusion of cortical zones Asynchronous inputs lead to segregation of cortical zones.Disuse or De-afferentation leads to invasion of unused cortical area by nearby neurons.
  4. 4. Sensory modulation in spatial neglect Novel Techniques Peripheral somatosensory- Magnetic stimulation Repetitive optokinetic stimulation Neck Vibration training Drug Treatment is currently unsuccessful
  5. 5. Sensory modulation and Stroke Rehabilitation aimed to increase use of paretic hand Virtual reality Motor imagery Prof. V.S..Ramachandran’s virtual reality box  Phantom limb phenomenon
  6. 6. Other techniques Caloric tests for balance  Brings awareness of illness to patient. Kinesthetic, visual, and auditory cues to improve Parkinsonian gait.
  7. 7. INTERMANUAL REFERRAL OFSENSATION AND EXTINCTION OFPAIN IN PERIPHERAL ANDCENTRAL LESIONS OF SOMATOSENSORY SYSTEM
  8. 8. BACKGROUND Allesthesia and extinction of referral sensation in brachial plexus lesions A.V. Srinivasan and V.S. Ramachandran et al (1998) Intermanual referral of sensations after central lesions of the somato sensory system K. Sathian et al (2000)
  9. 9. METHODS8 patients (19-51 years) Brachial plexus lesion – one Amputation – two Stroke – five Patients were video filmed in the movement disorder clinic. Pinprick, cold, vibration and kinesthesis were tested MRI & ENMG in all cases
  10. 10. CENTRAL LESIONStrokeThalamic stroke - threeTemparo parietal - twoThree to four months laterIpsilateral arm - no referral to leg
  11. 11. STROKE Contd… Intense pressure on the normal hand resulted in extinction of pain in the stroke side Pain returned within one minute of the pressure Intense pressure improved sensory and motor phenomenon
  12. 12. AMPUTATION Both the patients (below elbow & knee amputation) showed intermanual referral of sensation within 10 days. The referred sensations of touch and vibration lacked spatial organization and poor localization with a relatively high threshold
  13. 13. CASE VIGNETTE (BRACHIAL PLEXUS LESION) 21 year old girl, after total brachial plexus lesion was examined 6 months, 1 ½ & 2 ½ years after the lesion She had sensations intermanually referred in a topographically organized manner in the phantom limb
  14. 14. INTERMANUAL REFERAL AND EXTINCTION OF PAIN SENSATION Hemiparesis with Brachial hemisensory deficit Amputation plexus Spatial organi- Poor Poor Excellent sation Localisation Good Poor ExcellentTime of occurance After 3 to 4 months Immediate Immediate with in 7 days with in 7days Pain After a delay of Immediate Immediate Extinction 3 - 5 seconds
  15. 15. DISCUSSIONAnatomical facts 1. Primary somato sensory area 3b 2. A. Primary somato sensory area 1 & 2 2. B. Second somato sensory cortex and parietal operculumIn 2a & 2b the receptive fields are largerbilateral and callosal connection areabundant
  16. 16. DISCUSSION Contd… Contralateral referral of sensations was not found in normal subjects or in hemiparetic patients without hemi sensory loss Neural mechanisms for perceptual alteration not clear
  17. 17. DISCUSSION Contd…It appears that a decrease insomatosensory input to onecerebral hemisphere from thecontralateral hand allowsresponsiveness of neurons inthis hemisphere tomoderately intense tactilestimuli on the ipsilateral handto exceed perceptualthreshold (which does notnormally occur).
  18. 18. CONCLUSION Intermanual referral & extinction of pain occurred immediately in amputation and brachial plexus lesions and after a delay in stroke Intermanual referral of sensation occurred topographicaly organised manner in brachial plexus lesions but not in amputation and stroke
  19. 19. HemineglectAn Interesting Case from Prof.A.V.Srinivasan’s Unit
  20. 20. Can the mind believewhat the eye sees ? On vision, visuospatial dysfunction and body image perception in right hemispherical dysfunction Dr.K.Bijoy Menon (Senior Resident)Dr.Sundar, Dr.Saravanan, Dr.Ramakrishnan Dr.Nithyanandan (Asst.Prof) , Prof. A.V.Srinivasan
  21. 21. We thank Prof.V.S.Ramachandran , M.D., Ph.D., Director Centre for Brain and Cognitive Sciences University of California, San Diego, USA
  22. 22. Indrani. 50 year old female Presents with sudden onset of weakness of left upper and lower limb O/E. Conscious, oriented to time, place and person Mild left UMN facial paresis Left hemiplegia All peripheral pulses palpable
  23. 23.  CT Brain – P – Shows a (R) Occipitotemporal infarct
  24. 24. Higher mental function evaluation MMSE : 28/30 She was very attentive and quite clear in her conversation with us, though she would be complaining of a vague left sided shoulder painOn lobar testing, she had Left visual neglect with (L) hemianopia No auditory neglect Absent sensory perception in (L) upper limb and (L) tactile neglect in the lower limb
  25. 25. On cold caloric tests and its effect on neglect
  26. 26. Video of Neglect
  27. 27. Video of caloric test and Nystagmus
  28. 28. Video of disappearance of neglect
  29. 29. On ‘ Mirror Agnosia’Mirror Agnosia on the Right
  30. 30. After caloric test, Mirror Agnosia on the Left
  31. 31. ‘Mirror Agnosia’ to front
  32. 32.  On Anosognosia, Body neglect (Hemisomatognosia) and somatoparaphrenia Anosognosia – our patient has it Body neglect by Bisiach’s test – our patient does not have it Somatoparaphrenia – our patient has it
  33. 33. Somatoparaphrenia
  34. 34. On the somatophrenic arm and mirrors
  35. 35.  On Allesthesia, tactile neglect and ‘blind touch’ ‘Touch your left arm’ Bisiach’s test of body neglect. Absent proprioception and touch in the left upper limb Patient is still able to touch her left arm whatever position the examiner keeps the arm in.
  36. 36. Blind Sight Vs Blind Touch
  37. 37.  On visual imagery, neglect and caloric tests Visual imagery Bisiach’s test Our test
  38. 38. Results
  39. 39. Unconscious awareness in a person with Blind Sight And Blind TouchConscious mind and unconscious mindTheories of consciousness and the soul.
  40. 40. My sincere gratitude to my Teachers, Patients andMadras Institute of Neurology, MEDISCAN SYSTEMS & Mr.Thudhimugan for their computer work
  41. 41. Dedicated to my family formaking everything worthwhile
  42. 42. READ not to contradict or confuteNor to Believe and Take for Granted THANKbut TO WEIGH AND CONSIDER YOU

×