From unresponsive wakefulness to minimally conscious PLUS and functional locked-in syndromes: recent advances in our understanding of disorders of consciousness

Marie-Aurélie Bruno, Audrey Vanhaudenhuyse, Aurore Thibaut, Gustave Moonen, Steven Laureys, Marie-Aurélie Bruno, Audrey Vanhaudenhuyse, Aurore Thibaut, Gustave Moonen, Steven Laureys

Abstract

Functional neuroimaging and electrophysiology studies are changing our understanding of patients with coma and related states. Some severely brain damaged patients may show residual cortical processing in the absence of behavioural signs of consciousness. Given these new findings, the diagnostic errors and their potential effects on treatment as well as concerns regarding the negative associations intrinsic to the term vegetative state, the European Task Force on Disorders of Consciousness has recently proposed the more neutral and descriptive term unresponsive wakefulness syndrome. When vegetative/unresponsive patients show minimal signs of consciousness but are unable to reliably communicate the term minimally responsive or minimally conscious state (MCS) is used. MCS was recently subcategorized based on the complexity of patients' behaviours: MCS+ describes high-level behavioural responses (i.e., command following, intelligible verbalizations or non-functional communication) and MCS- describes low-level behavioural responses (i.e., visual pursuit, localization of noxious stimulation or contingent behaviour such as appropriate smiling or crying to emotional stimuli). Finally, patients who show non-behavioural evidence of consciousness or communication only measurable via para-clinical testing (i.e., functional MRI, positron emission tomography, EEG or evoked potentials) can be considered to be in a functional locked-in syndrome. An improved assessment of brain function in coma and related states is not only changing nosology and medical care but also offers a better-documented diagnosis and prognosis and helps to further identify the neural correlates of human consciousness.

References

    1. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2011 Apr;17(2):146-51
    1. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Dec;9(12):556-9
    1. Neurology. 2010 Nov 23;75(21):1871-8
    1. Neuroimage. 2007 Jul 1;36(3):979-92
    1. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Mar;23(3):570-8
    1. Ann Neurol. 2005 Oct;58(4):585-93
    1. BMC Neurol. 2010 May 26;10:35
    1. Brain Inj. 2008 Jul;22(7-8):617-23
    1. Neurology. 2010 Jul 20;75(3):239-45
    1. BMC Med. 2010 Nov 01;8:68
    1. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;42(1):19-27
    1. J Neurol. 2011 Jun;258(6):1058-65
    1. Clin Rehabil. 2000 Aug;14(4):408-16
    1. Prog Brain Res. 2009;177:399-411
    1. J Neurosurg. 1984 May;60(5):955-60
    1. J Clin Invest. 2006 Jul;116(7):1823-5
    1. Ann Neurol. 2006 Dec;60(6):744-5; author reply 745
    1. J Med Ethics. 2010 Jun;36(6):333-5
    1. Scott Med J. 1957 May;2(5):200-15
    1. J Med Ethics. 1995 Aug;21(4):205-8
    1. Ethics Med. 2005 Fall;21(3):167-77
    1. J Neurol. 2011 Oct;258(10):1801-4
    1. BMJ. 2010 Aug 02;341:c3765
    1. Neurology. 2010 Jul 20;75(3):246-52
    1. Front Hum Neurosci. 2011 Jan 27;5:5
    1. Expert Rev Neurother. 2008 Nov;8(11):1719-30
    1. Lancet. 1975 Mar 1;1(7905):480-4
    1. BMC Neurol. 2009 Jul 21;9:35
    1. Lancet Neurol. 2004 Sep;3(9):537-46
    1. N Engl J Med. 1994 May 26;330(21):1499-508
    1. Prog Brain Res. 2009;177:33-48
    1. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1988;90(3-4):73-80
    1. Pediatr Neurol. 2009 Oct;41(4):237-46
    1. Brain Inj. 2002 Jul;16(7):593-609
    1. Neurocase. 2009 Aug;15(4):271-7
    1. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989 Feb;70(2):104-8
    1. Neurosurgery. 1985 May;16(5):595-601
    1. Curr Opin Neurol. 2007 Dec;20(6):609-13
    1. Brain Inj. 1994 May-Jun;8(4):309-21
    1. Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2008 Aug;4(8):448-53
    1. Prog Brain Res. 2009;177:49-61
    1. Brain Inj. 1997 Oct;11(10):723-34
    1. Prog Brain Res. 2005;150:495-511
    1. Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2008 Oct;4(10):544-6
    1. Neurology. 2002 Feb 12;58(3):349-53
    1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Feb 3;106(5):1672-7
    1. BMJ Open. 2011 Feb 23;1(1):e000039
    1. Brain. 2010 Jan;133(Pt 1):161-71
    1. N Engl J Med. 2010 Feb 18;362(7):579-89
    1. Prog Brain Res. 2009;177:275-92
    1. Brain. 2011 Mar;134(Pt 3):769-82
    1. Hum Brain Mapp. 2012 Apr;33(4):778-96
    1. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Dec;85(12):2020-9
    1. Lancet. 1991 Oct 19;338(8773):977-8
    1. NeuroRehabilitation. 2004;19(4):343-7
    1. Neurology. 2008 Sep 23;71(13):1027-32
    1. Lancet Neurol. 2008 Nov;7(11):1013-20
    1. NeuroRehabilitation. 2011;28(1):3-14
    1. Brain. 2009 Sep;132(Pt 9):2541-52
    1. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005 Nov;6(11):899-909
    1. J Clin Invest. 2006 Jul;116(7):2005-11
    1. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008 Jul;79(7):826-8
    1. Intensive Care Med. 2011 Mar;37(3):542-9
    1. Prog Brain Res. 2005;150:537-43
    1. Neurology. 2008 Nov 11;71(20):1614-20
    1. Science. 2006 Sep 8;313(5792):1402
    1. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992 Jul;73(7):628-34
    1. Neurocrit Care. 2011 Dec;15(3):447-53
    1. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Dec;91(12):1795-813

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa