An interdisciplinary European group of clinical experts in the field of movement disorders and experienced Botulinum toxin users has updated the consensus for the use of Botulinum toxin in the treatment of children with cerebral palsy (CP). A problem-orientated approach was used focussing on both published and practice-based evidence. In part I of the consensus the authors have tabulated the supporting evidence to produce a concise but comprehensive information base, pooling data and experience from 36 institutions in 9 European countries which involves more than 10,000 patients and over 45,000 treatment sessions during a period of more than 280 treatment years. In part II of the consensus the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM) and Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) based Motor Development Curves have been expanded to provide a graphical framework on how to treat the motor disorders in children with CP. This graph is named "CP(Graph) Treatment Modalities - Gross Motor Function" and is intended to facilitate communication between parents, therapists and medical doctors concerning (1) achievable motor function, (2) realistic goal-setting and (3) treatment perspectives for children with CP. The updated European consensus 2009 summarises the current understanding regarding an integrated, multidisciplinary treatment approach using Botulinum toxin for the treatment of children with CP.
This study investigates whether the type of corticospinal reorganization (identified by transcranial magnetic stimulation) influences the efficacy of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT). Nine patients (five males, four females; mean age 16y [SD 6y 5mo], range 11-30y) controlling their paretic hand via ipsilateral corticospinal projections from the contralesional hemisphere and seven patients (three males, four females; mean age 17y [SD 7y], range 10-30y) with preserved crossed corticospinal projections from the affected hemisphere to the paretic hand underwent 12 consecutive days of CIMT. A Wolf motor function test applied before and after CIMT revealed a significant improvement in the quality of upper extremity movements in both groups. Only in patients with preserved crossed projections, however, was this amelioration accompanied by a significant gain in speed, whereas patients with ipsilateral projections tended to show speed reduction. These data, although preliminary, suggest that patients with congenital hemiparesis and ipsilateral corticospinal projections respond differently to CIMT.Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is a relatively new therapeutic approach focused on ameliorating upper extremity function in hemiparetic patients. It consists of immobilization of the nonparetic hand combined with individualized, intensive repetitive training of the paretic hand. CIMT has its origins in earlier basic research with rhesus monkeys that underwent deafferentation (surgical abolition of sensation by dorsal rhizotomy) of a single forelimb, followed by intensive training of the deafferented limb combined with constraint of the other, intact limb.
ABBREVIATIONS CIMTprojections from the contralesional hemisphere, which can enable the contralesional hemisphere to exert motor control over the paretic hand. In contrast to the primary motor representation (M1), the primary somatosensory representation (S1) of the paretic hand always remains in the lesioned hemisphere. Here, we report on differences in exerciseinduced neuroplasticity between individuals with such ipsilateral motor projections (ipsi) and individuals with early unilateral lesions but 'healthy' contralateral motor projections (contra).METHOD Sixteen children and young adults with congenital hemiparesis participated in the study (contralateral [Contra] group: n=7, four females, three males; age range 10-30y, median age 16y; ipsilateral [Ipsi] group: n=9, four females, five males; age range 11-31y, median age 12y; Manual Ability Classification System levels I to II in all individuals in both groups). The participants underwent a 12-day intervention of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT), consisting of individual training (2h/d) and group training (8h/d). Before and after CIMT, hand function was tested using the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and diverging neuroplastic effects were observed by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and magnetoencephalography (MEG). Statistical analysis of TMS data was performed using the non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test for pair-wise comparison; for fMRI standard statistical parametric and non-parametric mapping (SPM5, SnPM3) procedures (first level/second level) were carried out. Statistical analyses of MEG data involved analyses of variance (ANOVA) and t-tests.RESULTS While MEG demonstrated a significant increase in S1 activation in both groups (p=0.012), TMS showed a decrease in M1 excitability in the Ipsi group (p=0.036), but an increase in M1 excitability in the Contra group (p=0.043). Similarly, fMRI showed a decrease in M1 activation in the Ipsi group, but an increase in activation in the M1-S1 region in the Contra group (for both groups p<0.001 [SnPM3] within the search volume).INTERPRETATION Different patterns of sensorimotor (re)organization in individuals with early unilateral lesions show, on a cortical level, different patterns of exercise-induced neuroplasticity. The findings help to improve the understanding of the general principles of sensorimotor learning and will help to develop more specific therapies for different pathologies in congenital hemiparesis.Congenital hemiparesis is a unilateral movement disorder caused by a brain lesion acquired during the pre-, peri-, or neonatal period. Depending on the type, size, and time of appearance of the lesion, two types of corticospinal projections to the paretic hand can develop: (1) crossed projections from the affected hemisphere and (2)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.