3 research outputs found

    Clinical analysis of neurologic recovery in cervical spinal cord injury patient

    No full text
    ์˜ํ•™๊ณผ/์„์‚ฌ[ํ•œ๊ธ€] ์ฒ™์ˆ˜์†์ƒ ํ™˜์ž์˜ ์‹ ๊ฒฝํšŒ๋ณต์˜จ ํ™˜์ž์˜ ๊ธฐ๋ŠฅํšŒ๋ณต์„ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๊ณ  ํฌ๊ด„์  ์žฌํ™œ์น˜๋ฃŒ ๊ณ„ํš์„ ์„ธ์šฐ๋Š”๋ฐ ์ค‘์š”ํ•œ ์ •๋ณด๊ฐ€ ๋œ๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ ๊ฒฝ์ˆ˜์†์ƒ ํ™˜์ž์™ธ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ์—๋Š” ์ฒ™์ˆ˜ 1๋ถ„์ ˆ์˜ ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์ผ์ƒ์ƒ์ดฌ ๋™์ž‘์ด๋‚˜ ์ „๋ฐ˜์ ์ธ ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์— ํฐ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ์ฃผ๊ฒŒ ๋œ๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ๊ฒฝ์ˆ˜์†์ƒ ํ™˜์ž์—์„œ ์ •ํ™•ํ•œ ์†์ƒ๋ถ€์œ„๋ฅผ ๊ฒฐ์ •ํ•˜๊ณ  ๊ทธ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๋Š” ์ผ์€ ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” 1983๋…„ 1์›”๋ถ€ํ„ฐ 1993๋…„ 12์›”๊นŒ์ง€ ์—ฐ์„ธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ์‹ ์ดŒ์„ธ๋ธŒ๋ž€์Šค ๋ณ‘์› ๋ฐ ์˜๋™์„ธ๋ธŒ๋ž€์Šค ๋ณ‘์›์— ์ž…์›ํ•˜์˜€๋˜ ์™ธ์ƒ์„ฑ ๊ฒฝ์ˆ˜์†์ƒ ํ™˜์ž 52๋ช…์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณด์กด์  ์น˜๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ๋ฐ›์€ 24๋ช…, ์†์ƒํ›„ 1์ฃผ์ผ๋‚ด์— ์ˆ˜์ˆ ์„ ๋ฐ›์€ 11๋ช…, ์†์ƒํ›„ 1์ฃผ์ผ์ดํ›„์— ์ˆ˜์ˆ ์„ ๋ฐ›์€ 17๋ช…๋“ฑ 3๊ตฐ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜๋ˆ„์–ด ์šด๋™ ๋ฐ ๊ฐ๊ฐ ์†์ƒ๋ถ€์œ„์˜ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ณ  ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์–ป์—ˆ๋‹ค. 1. ์šด๋™๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์œผ๋กœ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•œ ์ฒ™์ˆ˜์†์ƒ๋ถ€์œ„์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ์ œ 1๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋Š” 45.8%(11๋ช…), ์ œ 2๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋Š” 45.5%(5๋ช…), ์ œ 3 ๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋Š” 47.1%(8๋ช…)๊ฐ€ ํ•œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ทผ ์ด์ƒ ํšŒ๋ณต๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์„ธ ๊ตฐ๊ฐ„์— ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ์œ ์˜ํ•œ ์ฐจ์ด๋Š” ์—†์—ˆ๋‹ค. 2. ๊ฐ๊ฐ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์œผ๋กœ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•œ ์ฒ™์ˆ˜์†์ƒ๋ถ€์œ„์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ์ œ 1๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋Š” 45.8%(11๋ช…), ์ œ 2๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋Š” 27.3%(3๋ช…), ์ œ 3 ๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋Š” 35.3%(6๋ช…)๊ฐ€ ํ•œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ทผ ์ด์ƒ ํšŒ๋ณต๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์„ธ ๊ตฐ๊ฐ„์— ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ์œ ์˜ํ•œ ์ฐจ์ด๋Š” ์—†์—ˆ์œผ๋‚˜ ์ œ 2๊ตฐ์—์„œ ํšŒ๋ณต์œจ์ด ๋–จ์–ด์ง€๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. 3. ์ˆ˜์ˆ ์งํ›„ ์ง„์ฐฐ์ƒ ์ฒ™์ˆ˜์†์ƒ๋ถ€์œ„๊ฐ€ ์•…ํ™”๋˜์—ˆ๋˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๋Š” 8๋ก€์—ˆ๋Š”๋ฐ 3๋ก€๋ฅผ ์ œ์™ธํ•˜๊ณ ๋Š” ๋ชจ๋‘ 4์ฃผ์ด๋‚ด์— ์ˆ˜์ˆ ์ „ ์ƒํƒœ๋กœ ํšŒ๋ณต๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ ์ œ 2๊ตฐ๊ณผ ์ œ 3๊ตฐ๊ฐ„์— ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ์œ ์˜ํ•œ ์ฐจ์ด๋Š” ์—†์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์ƒ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋กœ ๋ณด์•„ ์™ธ์ƒ์„ฑ ๊ฒฝ์ˆ˜์†์ƒ ํ™˜์ž์˜ ์šด๋™๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์€ ์น˜๋ฃŒ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์— ๊ด€๊ณ„์—†์ด ํ‰๊ท  46%์—์„œ ํ•œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ทผ ์ด์ƒ ํšŒ๋ณต๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ฐ๊ฐ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์€ ์ œ 2๊ตฐ์—์„œ ํšŒ๋ณต์œจ์ด ์•ฝ๊ฐ„ ๋–จ์–ด์ง€๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ ๋ณด์˜€์œผ๋‚˜ ์น˜๋ฃŒ์— ๋”ฐ๋ฅธ ์˜ˆํ›„์˜ ์ฐจ์ด๋Š” ๋ณ„๋กœ ์—…์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ์ฆ๋ก€์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ ์ ๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋งŽ์€ ์ˆซ์ž๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜๋Š” ์ „ํ–ฅ์ ์ธ ์ถ”๊ฐ€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ํ•„์š”ํ•˜๋ฆฌ ๋ผ ์ƒ๊ฐ๋œ๋‹ค. [์˜๋ฌธ] Determining neurologic level in spinal cord injury patient and change of neurologic function is valuable in predicting improvement of functional ability and developing a comprehensive rehabilitation plan. Previous studies have grouped spinal cord injury patients according to Frankel's classification system and have reported recovery in terms of changes in their grades. The purpose of this study is to investigate the neurologic recovery in terms of neurologic levees and to compare the recovery among the conservative care group, the early operated group, and the late operated group. Fifty two traumatic cervical spinal cord injury patients who were admitted to Severance Hospital and Youngdong Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, between January, 1983 and December, 1993, were studied retrospectively dividing them into 3 groups. Twenty four patients were grouped into the conservative care group and11 and 17 patients were grouped into the early and the late operated groups, respectively. The results were as follows : 1. In motor level recovery, 45.8% of patients in group 1, 45.5% of patients in group 2, and 47.1% of patients in group 3 recovered more than 1 root level. There were no statistical difference among 3 groups. 2. In sensory level recovery, 45.8% of patients in group 1, 27.3% of patients in group 2 , and 35.3% of patients in group 3 recovered more than 1 root level. There were no statistical difference among 3 groups. But the recovery rate was lowest in group 2 patients. 3. In 8 cases, neurologic level became higher immediately after operation. However with exception of 3 cases, all patients recovered to preoperative levels. In this study, regardless of treatment methods, 46 % of cervical spinal cord iajury patients improved more than 1 motor root level. The group 2 patients showed lowest neurologic recovery rate. But the cases were too small to be statistically significant. Prospective study with large spinal cord injury population is in need.restrictio

    Changes of electrophysiologic properties of dorsal root ganglion cells in peripheral nerve-injured rats.

    No full text
    ์˜๊ณผํ•™์‚ฌ์—…๋‹จ/๋ฐ•์‚ฌ[ํ•œ๊ธ€] ๋ง์ดˆ์‹ ๊ฒฝ ์†์ƒ ํ›„์— ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚˜๋Š” ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ณ‘์„ฑ ํ†ต์ฆ์€ ์ž๋ฐœ์„ฑ ์—ฐ์†Œํ†ต์„ ํฌํ•จํ•˜์—ฌ, ํ†ต๊ฐ๊ณผ๋ฏผ (hyperalgesia), ์ด์งˆํ†ต(allodynia) ๋“ฑ์˜ ์ฆ์ƒ์„ ๋ณด์ธ๋‹ค. ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ณ‘์„ฑ ํ†ต์ฆ์ค‘ ํŠนํžˆ ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ณ„์™€ ์—ฐ๊ด€๋˜์–ด์žˆ๋Š” ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๋ฅผ ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์„ฑ ์œ ์ง€ํ†ต์ฆ(sympatetically maintained pain, ์ดํ›„ SMP ๋กœ ๊ธฐ์ˆ )์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ํ•œ๋‹ค. SMP๋Š” ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ณ„์˜ ํ™œ์„ฑํ™”์— ์˜ํ•ด ํ†ต์ฆ์ด ๋”์šฑ ์•…ํ™”๋˜๋Š” ํŠน์ง•์„ ๋ณด์ด๊ณ , ์ž„์ƒ์—์„œ๋Š” ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ฐจ๋‹จ๋ฒ•์ด ์น˜๋ฃŒ๋ชฉ์ ์œผ๋กœ ์ž์ฃผ ์ด์šฉ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ˜„์žฌ ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ณ„๊ฐ€ ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ํ†ต์ฆ์„ ์•…ํ™”์‹œํ‚ค๋Š”์ง€์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ž์„ธํ•œ ๊ธฐ์ „์€ ์•Œ๋ ค์ ธ ์žˆ์ง€ ์•Š๋‹ค. ์„œ๋กœ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ๋™ ๋ฌผ๋ชจ๋ธ์—์„œ ๋ฐํ˜€์ง„ ๋ฐ”๋กœ๋Š” ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ณ„์˜ ํ™œ์„ฑํ™”์— ์˜ํ•ด ๊ฐ๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ด ํ™œ์„ฑํ™”๋˜๊ณ , ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์€ ฮฑ ์ˆ˜์šฉ์ฒด๋ฅผ ๋งค๊ฐœ๋กœ ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์‚ฌ์‹ค์€ ํ™•๋ฆฝ๋˜์–ด ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ๊ต๊ฐ-๊ฐ๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๊ฐ„์˜ coupling ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ฮฑ ์ˆ˜์šฉ์ฒด์˜ ๋งค๊ฐœ๊ฐ€ ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ง€๋Š”์ง€์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ธ ๊ธฐ์ „์€ ์˜๊ฒฌ์ด ๋ถ„ ๋ถ„ํ•˜๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฐ ์ด๊ฒฌ์€ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ์‹คํ—˜์ด in vivo ์ƒํƒœ์˜ ์‹คํ—˜์œผ๋กœ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์˜ network์ด ์กด์žฌํ•˜๋Š” ์ƒํƒœ์—์„œ ์—ฌ๋Ÿฌ ์ธ์ž๋ฅผ ๋ฐฐ์ œํ•˜์ง€ ๋ชปํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์ด ๊ทธ ์›์ธ์ผ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ƒ๊ฐ๋œ๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ์†์ƒ๋ฐ›์€ ๋ฐฐ๊ทผ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ ˆ ์„ธํฌ๋ฅผ ๋‹จ์ผ์„ธํฌ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฆฌํ•˜์—ฌ, ์ „๊ธฐ์ƒ๋ฆฌํ•™์  ํŠน์„ฑ ์ค‘ norep inephrine์— ์˜ํ•œ ํฅ๋ถ„์„ฑ ์ฆ๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ์–ด๋–ค ๊ธฐ์ „์— ์˜ํ•˜๋Š”์ง€๋ฅผ ๋ฐํžˆ๊ณ ์ž ํฅ๋ถ„์„ฑ ์ฆ๊ฐ€์— ๊ด€์—ฌํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋ช‡ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ionic channel์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ norepinephrine์˜ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ์ง์ ‘ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ทธ ๊ธฐ์ „์„ ๋ฐํžˆ๊ณ ์ž ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์‹คํ—˜๋™๋ฌผ๋กœ๋Š” ์ฅ๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์˜€๊ณ  ์ œ 4, 5, 6 ์š”์ฒ™์ˆ˜ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ ์ค‘ ์ œ 5, 6 ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์„ ๊ฒฐ์ฐฐํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ์ขŒ๊ณจ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์— ๋ถ€๋ถ„์ ์ธ ์†์ƒ์„ ์ค€ SMP ๋ชจ๋ธ์ฅ๋ฅผ ์ œ์ž‘ํ•˜๊ณ  ๋ฐฐ๊ทผ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ ˆ ์„ธํฌ๋ฅผ ๋ถ„๋ฆฌํ•˜์—ฌ ์ „๊ธฐ์ƒ๋ฆฌํ•™์  ํŠน์„ฑ์„ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ณ‘์„ฑ ํ†ต์ฆ๋ชจ๋ธ์ฅ์—์„œ ์†์ƒ๋ฐ›์€ ๋ฐฐ๊ทผ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ ˆ ์„ธํฌ์˜ ์ „๊ธฐ์ƒ๋ฆฌํ•™์  ํŠน์„ฑ์„ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ norepinephrine์— ์˜ํ•ด ํฅ๋ถ„์„ฑ์ด ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ  ๋‚ดํ–ฅ์„ฑ Caยฒ^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜์™€ ์™ธํ–ฅ์„ฑ K^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜๊ฐ€ ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ๋ณ€ํ™”๋Š” ฮฑ2 antagonist์ธ yohimbine์„ ์ „ ์ฒ˜์น˜ํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ norepinephrine์˜ ๋‚ดํ–ฅ์„ฑ Caยฒ^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜์™€ ์™ธํ–ฅ์„ฑ K^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์–ต์ œ๋˜์–ด ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์— ฮฑ2 adrenergic receptor๊ฐ€ ๊ด€์—ฌํ•จ์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ํ•œํŽธ Caยฒ^+ ํ†ต๋กœ ์–ต์ œ์ œ์ธ cadmium ์ „ ์ฒ˜์น˜์— ์˜ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” K^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ norepinephrine์˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์–ต์ œ๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ Caยฒ^+ ์˜์กด์„ฑ K^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜ ์–ต์ œ์ œ์ธ iberiotoxin์„ ์ง์ ‘ ํˆฌ์—ฌํ•ด๋ณธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ K^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ norepinephrine์˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์–ต์ œ๋จ๋„ ํ™•์ธํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์ƒ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ณ‘์„ฑ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ฅ์—์„œ์˜ ์†์ƒ๋œ ๋ฐฐ๊ทผ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ ˆ์„ธํฌ๋Š” norepinephrine์— ์˜ํ•ด ํฅ๋ถ„์„ฑ์ด ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ ๊ทธ ๊ธฐ์ „์œผ๋กœ Caยฒ^+ ์˜์กด์„ฑ K^+ ์ „๋ฅ˜์˜ ์–ต์ œ๊ฐ€ ์ค‘์š”ํ•œ ์—ญํ• ์„ ํ•  ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฌ๋ฃŒ๋œ๋‹ค. -------------------- ํ•ต์‹ฌ๋˜๋Š” ๋ง: ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ณ‘์„ฑ ํ†ต์ฆ, ๊ต๊ฐ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์„ฑ ํ†ต์ฆ, ๋ฐฐ๊ทผ์‹ ๊ฒฝ์ ˆ, patch clamp, norepinephrine [์˜๋ฌธ] The neuropathic pain which induced by peripheral nerve injury shows spontaneous pain, hyperalgesia and allodynia. If the neuropathic pain is related to the sympathetic system, it is classified as a sympathetically maintained pain (SMP). The SMP is aggravated by sympathetic activation, and sympathetic block is used as a clinical treatment. Until now, it is unclear that what mechanism is involved in aggravation of pain by sympathetic activation. Many investigations about this topics using experimental animal models agrees that sensory nerve is activated by sympathetic activation and it is mediated by alpha adrenergic receptor. However, the detailed mechanism for the involvement of alpha adrenergic receptor on sympathetic-sensory coupling is controversial because previous many experiments were done using in vivo preparation which could not exclude many complicating factors. Thus we isolate injured dorsal root ganglion cells and investigate the effect of norepinephrine on several ionic channels which is known to be involved in membrane excitability. The neuropathic animal models were made by ligation of the L5, L6 spinal nerves of rat. The dorsal root ganglion cells were acutely isolated and then electrophysiologic properties were studied. In current clamp mode, we confirmed the membrane excitability was increased by norepinephrine and in voltage clamp mode, inward Caยฒ^+ current and outward K^+ current were decreased by norepinephrine in DRG neuron of neuropathic model rat. Yohimbine, an ฮฑ2 antagonist suppressed the inhibitory effect of norepinephrine on inward Caยฒ^+ and outward K^+ current of neuropathic DRG neuron. Cadmium, a calcium channel blocker, suppressed the inhibitory effect of norepinephrine on the outward K^+ current and iberiotoxin, a calcium activated potassium channel blocker, suppressed the inhibitory effect of norepinephrine on outward K^+ current of neuropathic DRG neuron. These results suggests that at least direct actions of norepinephrine on DRG neuron contribute to sympathetic-sensory coupling and supression of K_Ca channel activity may be a important mechanism in this process.ope
    corecore