Транскраниальная стимуляция постоянным током при постинсультной гемианопсии

Ilya S. Bakulin1, Dmitry Yu. Lagoda1, Alexandra G. Poydasheva1, Elena I. Kremneva1, Natalia A. Suponeva1, Mikhail A. Piradov1
1ФГБНУ «Научный центр неврологии», Москва, Россия

Аннотация


Введение. Разработка новых подходов к реабилитации пациентов с постинсультной гемианопсией является актуальной задачей, учитывая высокую частоту встречаемости и негативное влияние этого нарушения на качество жизни пациентов.

Цель исследования — изучение влияния транскраниальной электрической стимуляции постоянным током (tDCS) на качество жизни и качество зрительного восприятия у пациентов с постинсультной гемианопсией, анализ безопасности и переносимости этого метода.

 

Материалы и методы. В исследование было включено 10 пациентов с постинсультной гемианопсией. Пациентам проводили 10 сессий tDCS (2 мА, 20 мин анод — Oz, катод — Сz при одностороннем поражении и анод — О1 и О2, катод — Fp1 и Fp2 при двустороннем). Переносимость tDCS оценивали после каждой сессии с помощью стандартизированного опросника. Клиническая оценка до и после курса tDCS проводилась с применением опросника для оценки качества зрительного восприятия Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) и опросника для оценки качества жизни The Short Form-36 (SF-36). У 5 пациентов до и после курса tDCS проводилась функциональная МРТ со зрительной парадигмой.

Результаты. Нежелательные эффекты зарегистрированы во время 9,9% сессий и в большинстве случаев имели слабую степень выраженности. Прекращение участия в исследовании зарегистрировано в 1 случае в связи с усилением боли в руке и ноге у пациента с центральным постинсультным болевым синдромом, которое, вероятно, не связано с биологическими эффектами стимуляции. В анализ включены данные 9 пациентов. После проведения tDCS выявлено статистически значимое увеличение общего показателя по шкале качества зрительного восприятия VFQ-25 (p = 0,02), а также улучшение по таким её разделам, как социальная активность (р = 0,02), психическое здоровье (р = 0,02), зависимость от окружающих (р = 0,04) и периферическое зрение (р = 0,04). Также отмечено статистически значимое улучшение психологического компонента качества жизни (р = 0,04), жизненной активности (р = 0,03), социального функционирования (р = 0,02), ролевого функционирования, обусловленного физическим состоянием (р = 0,04) и общего состояния здоровья (р = 0,008). В 3 случаях после tDCS выявлено увеличение активации затылочной коры по данным функциональной МРТ со зрительной парадигмой.

Заключение. tDCS является безопасным, хорошо переносимым и потенциально эффективным методом у пациентов с постинсультной гемианопсией. Для уточнения эффективности этого метода при гемианопсии необходимо проведение более крупных контролируемых рандомизированных исследований.

Список литературы
1. Rowe F., Brand D., Jackson C.A. et al. Visual impairment following stroke: do stroke patients require vision assessment? Ageing 2009; 38: 188–193. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afn230. PMID: 19029069.
2. Rowe F.J.; VIS writing Group. Vision In Stroke cohort: Profile overview of visual impairment. Brain Behav 2017; 7: e00771. DOI 10.1002/brb3.771. PMID: 29201538.
3. Pula J.H., Yuen C.A. Eyes and stroke: the visual aspects of cerebrovascular disease. Stroke Vasc Neurol 2017; 2: 210–220. DOI: 10.1136/svn-2017-000079. PMID: 29507782.
4. Zhang X., Kedar S., Lynn M.J. et al. Homonymous hemianopia in stroke. J Neuroophthalmol 2006; 26: 180–183. DOI: 10.1097/01.wno.0000235587.41040.39. PMID: 16966935.
5. Gilhotra J.S., Mitchell P., Healey P.R. et al. Homonymous visual field defects and stroke in an older population. Stroke 2002; 33: 2417–2420. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.0000037647.10414.d2. PMID: 12364731.
6. Zhang X., Kedar S., Lynn M.J. et al. Homonymous hemianopias: clinical-anatomic correlations in 904 cases. Neurology 2006; 66: 906–910. DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000203913.12088.93. PMID: 16567710.
7. Rowe F.J., Wright D., Brand D. et al. A prospective profile of visual field loss following stroke: prevalence, type, rehabilitation and outcome. Biomed Res Int 2013; 2013: 719096. DOI: 10.1155/2013/719096. PMID: 24089687.
8. Urbanski M., Coubard O.A., Bourlon C. Visualizing the blind brain: brain imaging of visual field defects from early recovery to rehabilitation techniques. Front Integr Neurosci 2014; 8: 74. DOI: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00074. PMID: 25324739.
9. Gall C., Franke G.H., Sabel B.A. Vision-related quality of life in first stroke patients with homonymous visual field defects. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010; 8: 33. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-33. PMID: 20346125.
10. Sand K.M., Wilhelmsen G., Naess H. et al. Vision problems in ischaemic stroke patients: effects on life quality and disability. Eur J Neurol 2016; 23 Suppl 1: 1–7. DOI: 10.1111/ene.12848. PMID: 26563092.
11. Bowers A.R. Driving with homonymous visual field loss: a review of the literature. ClinExpOptom 2016; 99: 402–418. DOI: 10.1111/cxo.12425. PMID: 27535208.
12. Gall C., Sabel B.A. Reading performance after vision rehabilitation of subjects with homonymous visual field defects. PM R 2012; 4: 928–935. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.08.020. PMID: 23122896.
13. Ramrattan R.S., Wolfs R.C., Panda-Jonas S. et al. Prevalence and causes of visual field loss in the elderly and associations with impairment in daily functioning: the Rotterdam Study. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119: 1788–1794. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.119.12.1788. PMID: 11735788.
14. Wolter M., Preda S. Visual deficits following stroke: maximizing participation in rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 2006; 13: 12–21. DOI: 10.1310/3JRY-B168-5N49-XQWA. PMID: 16987788.
15. Sand K.M., Naess H., Thomassen L., Hoff J.M. Visual field defect after ischemic stroke-impact on mortality. Acta Neurol Scand 2018; 137: 293–298. DOI: 10.1111/ane.12870. PMID: 29148038.
16. Grunda T., Marsalek P., Sykorova P. Homonymous hemianopia and related visual defects: Restoration of vision after a stroke. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars) 2013; 73: 237–49. PMID: 23823985.
17. Goodwin D. Homonymous hemianopia: challenges and solutions. Clin Ophthalmol 2014; 8: 1919–1927. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S59452. PMID: 25284978.
18. Frolov A., Feuerstein J., Subramanian P.S. Homonymous hemianopia and vision restoration therapy. Neurol Clin 2017; 35: 29–43. DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2016.08.010. PMID: 27886894.
19. Sabel B.A., Henrich-Noack P., Fedorov A., Gall C. Vision restoration after brain and retina damage: the "residual vision activation theory". Prog Brain Res 2011; 192: 199–262. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53355-5.00013-0. PMID: 21763527.
20. Gall C., Silvennoinen K., Granata G. et al. Non-invasive electric current stimulation for restoration of vision after unilateral occipital stroke. Contemp Clin Trials 2015; 43: 231–236. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.06.005. PMID: 26072125.
21. Priori A., Berardelli A., Rona S. et al. Polarization of the human motor cortex through the scalp. Neuroreport 1998; 9: 2257–2260. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-199807130-00020. PMID: 9694210.
22. Nitsche M.A., Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol 2000; 527(Pt 3): 633–639. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x. PMID: 10990547.
23. Yavari F., Jamil A., MosayebiSamani M. et al. Basic and functional effects of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) — an introduction. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2018; 85: 81–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.06.015. PMID: 28688701.
24. Cirillo G., Di Pino G., Capone F. et al. Neurobiological after-effects of non-invasive brain stimulation. Brain Stimul 2017; 10: 1–18. DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.11.009. PMID: 27931886.
25. Lefaucheur J.P., Antal A., Ayache S.S. et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128: 56–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087. PMID: 27866120.
26. Бакулин И.С., Пойдашева А.Г., Павлов Н.А. и др. Транскраниальная электрическая стимуляция в улучшении функции руки при инсульте. Успехи физиологических наук 2019; 50(1): 90–104. DOI: 10.1134/S030117981901003X.
27. Salazar A.P.S., Vaz P.G., Marchese R.R. et al. Noninvasive brain stimulation improves hemispatial neglect after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2018; 99: 355–366.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.07.009. PMID: 28802812.
28. Sebastian R., Tsapkini K., Tippett D.C. Transcranial direct current stimulation in post stroke aphasia and primary progressive aphasia: Current knowledge and future clinical applications. NeuroRehabilitation 2016; 39: 141–152. DOI: 10.3233/NRE-161346. PMID: 27314871.
29. Plow E.B., Obretenova S.N., Fregni F. et al. Comparison of visual field training for hemianopia with active versus sham transcranial direct cortical stimulation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012; 26: 616–626. DOI: 10.1177/1545968311431963. PMID: 22291042.
30. Plow E.B., Obretenova S.N., Jackson M.L., Merabet L.B. Temporal profile of functional visual rehabilitative outcomes modulated by transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuromodulation 2012; 15: 367–373. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1403.2012.00440.x. PMID: 22376226.
31. Alber R., Moser H., Gall C. et al. Combined transcranial direct current stimulation and vision restoration training in subacute stroke rehabilitation: a pilot study. PM R 2017; 9: 787–794. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.12.003. PMID: 28082176.
32. Halko M.A., Datta A., Plow E.B. et al. Neuroplastic changes following rehabilitative training correlate with regional electrical field induced with tDCS. Neuroimage 2011; 57: 885–891. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.026. PMID: 21620985.
33. Plow E.B., Obretenova S.N., Halko M.A. et al. Combining visual rehabilitative training and noninvasive brain stimulation to enhance visual function in patients with hemianopia: a comparative case study. PM R 2011; 3: 825–835. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.05.026. PMID: 21944300.
34. Matteo B.M., Viganò B., Cerri C.G. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with blindsight rehabilitation for the treatment of homonymous hemianopia: a report of two-cases. J Phys Ther Sci 2017; 29: 1700–1705. DOI: 10.1589/jpts.29.1700. PMID: 28932016.
35. Larcombe S.J., Kulyomina Y., Antonova N. et al. Visual training in hemianopia alters neural activity in the absence of behavioural improvement: a pilot study. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2018; 38: 538–549. DOI: 10.1111/opo.12584. PMID: 30357899
36. Mangione C.M., Lee P.P., Gutierrez P.R. et al. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119: 1050–1058. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.119.7.1050. PMID: 11448327.
37. Мочалова А.С. Качество жизни пациентов при различных вариантах лечения меланомы хориоидеи: дис. … канд. мед. наук. Челябинск, 2014. 128 с.
38. Новик А.А., Ионова Т.И. Руководство по исследованию качества жизни в медицине. М.: ОЛМА Медиа Групп, 2007. 313 с.
39. Antal A., Alekseichuk I., Bikson M. et al. Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128: 1774–1809. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001. PMID: 28709880.
40. Antal A., Kincses T.Z., Nitsche M.A., Paulus W. Manipulation of phosphene thresholds by transcranial direct current stimulation in man. Exp Brain Res 2003; 150: 375–378. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-003-1459-8. PMID: 12698316.
41. Antal A., Kincses T.Z., Nitsche M.A. et al. Excitability changes induced in the human primary visual cortex by transcranial direct current stimulation: direct electrophysiological evidence. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004; 45: 702–707. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.03-0688. PMID: 14744917.
42. Kraft A., Roehmel J., Olma M.C. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation affects visual perception measured by threshold perimetry. Exp Brain Res 2010; 207: 283–290. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2453-6. PMID: 21046369.
43. Costa T.L., Gualtieri M., Barboni M.T. et al. Contrasting effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on central and peripheral visual fields. Exp Brain Res 2015; 233: 1391–1397. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-015-4213-0. PMID: 25650104.
44. Behrens J.R., Kraft A., Irlbacher K. et al. Long-lasting enhancement of visual perception with repetitive noninvasive transcranial direct current stimulation. Front Cell Neurosci 2017; 11: 238. DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2017.00238. PMID: 28860969.
45. Matteo B.M., Vigano B., Cerri C.G., Perin C. Visual field restorative rehabilitation after brain injury. J Vis 2016; 16: 11. DOI: 10.1167/16.9.11. PMID: 27472498.
46. Morland A.B., Le S., Carroll E. et al. The role of spared calcarine cortex and lateral occipital cortex in the responses of human hemianopes to visual motion. J Cogn Neurosci 2004; 16: 204–218. DOI: 10.1162/089892904322984517. PMID: 15068592.
47. Chokron S., Perez C., Peyrin C. Behavioral consequences and cortical reorganization in homonymous hemianopia. Front Syst Neurosci 2016; 10: 57. DOI: 10.3389/fnsys.2016.00057. PMID: 27445717.
48. Fendrich R., Wessinger C.M., Gazzaniga M.S. Speculations on the neural basis of islands of blindsight. Prog Brain Res 2001; 134: 353–366. DOI: 10.1016/s0079-6123(01)34023-2. PMID: 11702554.
49. Eysel U.T., Schweigart G. Increased receptive field size in the surround of chronic lesions in the adult cat visual cortex. Cereb Cortex 1999; 9: 101–109. DOI: 10.1016/s0304-3940(02)01153-9. PMID: 12531465.
50. Pleger B., Foerster A.F., Widdig W. et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging mirrors recovery of visual perception after repetitive tachistoscopic stimulation in patients with partial cortical blindness. Neurosci Lett 2003; 335: 192–196.
51. Nelles G., Widman G., de Greiff A. et al. Brain representation of hemifield stimulation in poststroke visual field defects. Stroke 2002; 33: 1286–1293. PMID: 11988605.
52. Nelles G., de Greiff A., Pscherer A. et al. Cortical activation in hemianopia after stroke. Neurosci Lett 2007; 426: 34–38. PMID: 17881128.


Ключевые слова

инсульт; гемианопсия; неинвазивная стимуляция мозга; транскраниальная электрическая стимуляция постоянным током; функциональная МРТ; качество жизни

Полный текст:

PDF

Литература

Список литературы

Rowe F., Brand D., Jackson C.A. et al. Visual impairment following stroke: do stroke patients require vision assessment? Ageing 2009; 38: 188–193. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afn230. PMID: 19029069.

Rowe F.J.; VIS writing Group. Vision In Stroke cohort: Profile overview of visual impairment. Brain Behav 2017; 7: e00771. DOI 10.1002/brb3.771. PMID: 29201538.

Pula J.H., Yuen C.A. Eyes and stroke: the visual aspects of cerebrovascular disease. Stroke Vasc Neurol 2017; 2: 210–220. DOI: 10.1136/svn-2017-000079. PMID: 29507782.

Zhang X., Kedar S., Lynn M.J. et al. Homonymous hemianopia in stroke. J Neuroophthalmol 2006; 26: 180–183. DOI: 10.1097/01.wno.0000235587.41040.39. PMID: 16966935.

Gilhotra J.S., Mitchell P., Healey P.R. et al. Homonymous visual field defects and stroke in an older population. Stroke 2002; 33: 2417–2420. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.0000037647.10414.d2. PMID: 12364731.

Zhang X., Kedar S., Lynn M.J. et al. Homonymous hemianopias: clinical-anatomic correlations in 904 cases. Neurology 2006; 66: 906–910. DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000203913.12088.93. PMID: 16567710.

Rowe F.J., Wright D., Brand D. et al. A prospective profile of visual field loss following stroke: prevalence, type, rehabilitation and outcome. Biomed Res Int 2013; 2013: 719096. DOI: 10.1155/2013/719096. PMID: 24089687.

Urbanski M., Coubard O.A., Bourlon C. Visualizing the blind brain: brain imaging of visual field defects from early recovery to rehabilitation techniques. Front Integr Neurosci 2014; 8: 74. DOI: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00074. PMID: 25324739.

Gall C., Franke G.H., Sabel B.A. Vision-related quality of life in first stroke patients with homonymous visual field defects. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010; 8: 33. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-33. PMID: 20346125.

Sand K.M., Wilhelmsen G., Naess H. et al. Vision problems in ischaemic stroke patients: effects on life quality and disability. Eur J Neurol 2016; 23 Suppl 1: 1–7. DOI: 10.1111/ene.12848. PMID: 26563092.

Bowers A.R. Driving with homonymous visual field loss: a review of the literature. ClinExpOptom 2016; 99: 402–418. DOI: 10.1111/cxo.12425. PMID: 27535208.

Gall C., Sabel B.A. Reading performance after vision rehabilitation of subjects with homonymous visual field defects. PM R 2012; 4: 928–935. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.08.020. PMID: 23122896.

Ramrattan R.S., Wolfs R.C., Panda-Jonas S. et al. Prevalence and causes of visual field loss in the elderly and associations with impairment in daily functioning: the Rotterdam Study. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119: 1788–1794. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.119.12.1788. PMID: 11735788.

Wolter M., Preda S. Visual deficits following stroke: maximizing participation in rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 2006; 13: 12–21. DOI: 10.1310/3JRY-B168-5N49-XQWA. PMID: 16987788.

Sand K.M., Naess H., Thomassen L., Hoff J.M. Visual field defect after ischemic stroke-impact on mortality. Acta Neurol Scand 2018; 137: 293–298. DOI: 10.1111/ane.12870. PMID: 29148038.

Grunda T., Marsalek P., Sykorova P. Homonymous hemianopia and related visual defects: Restoration of vision after a stroke. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars) 2013; 73: 237–49. PMID: 23823985.

Goodwin D. Homonymous hemianopia: challenges and solutions. Clin Ophthalmol 2014; 8: 1919–1927. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S59452. PMID: 25284978.

Frolov A., Feuerstein J., Subramanian P.S. Homonymous hemianopia and vision restoration therapy. Neurol Clin 2017; 35: 29–43. DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2016.08.010. PMID: 27886894.

Sabel B.A., Henrich-Noack P., Fedorov A., Gall C. Vision restoration after brain and retina damage: the "residual vision activation theory". Prog Brain Res 2011; 192: 199–262. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53355-5.00013-0. PMID: 21763527.

Gall C., Silvennoinen K., Granata G. et al. Non-invasive electric current stimulation for restoration of vision after unilateral occipital stroke. Contemp Clin Trials 2015; 43: 231–236. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.06.005. PMID: 26072125.

Priori A., Berardelli A., Rona S. et al. Polarization of the human motor cortex through the scalp. Neuroreport 1998; 9: 2257–2260. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-199807130-00020. PMID: 9694210.

Nitsche M.A., Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol 2000; 527(Pt 3): 633–639. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x. PMID: 10990547.

Yavari F., Jamil A., MosayebiSamani M. et al. Basic and functional effects of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) — an introduction. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2018; 85: 81–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.06.015. PMID: 28688701.

Cirillo G., Di Pino G., Capone F. et al. Neurobiological after-effects of non-invasive brain stimulation. Brain Stimul 2017; 10: 1–18. DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.11.009. PMID: 27931886.

Lefaucheur J.P., Antal A., Ayache S.S. et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128: 56–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087. PMID: 27866120.

Бакулин И.С., Пойдашева А.Г., Павлов Н.А. и др. Транскраниальная электрическая стимуляция в улучшении функции руки при инсульте. Успехи физиологических наук 2019; 50(1): 90–104. DOI: 10.1134/S030117981901003X.

Salazar A.P.S., Vaz P.G., Marchese R.R. et al. Noninvasive brain stimulation improves hemispatial neglect after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2018; 99: 355–366.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.07.009. PMID: 28802812.

Sebastian R., Tsapkini K., Tippett D.C. Transcranial direct current stimulation in post stroke aphasia and primary progressive aphasia: Current knowledge and future clinical applications. NeuroRehabilitation 2016; 39: 141–152. DOI: 10.3233/NRE-161346. PMID: 27314871.

Plow E.B., Obretenova S.N., Fregni F. et al. Comparison of visual field training for hemianopia with active versus sham transcranial direct cortical stimulation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012; 26: 616–626. DOI: 10.1177/1545968311431963. PMID: 22291042.

Plow E.B., Obretenova S.N., Jackson M.L., Merabet L.B. Temporal profile of functional visual rehabilitative outcomes modulated by transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuromodulation 2012; 15: 367–373. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1403.2012.00440.x. PMID: 22376226.

Alber R., Moser H., Gall C. et al. Combined transcranial direct current stimulation and vision restoration training in subacute stroke rehabilitation: a pilot study. PM R 2017; 9: 787–794. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.12.003. PMID: 28082176.

Halko M.A., Datta A., Plow E.B. et al. Neuroplastic changes following rehabilitative training correlate with regional electrical field induced with tDCS. Neuroimage 2011; 57: 885–891. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.026. PMID: 21620985.

Plow E.B., Obretenova S.N., Halko M.A. et al. Combining visual rehabilitative training and noninvasive brain stimulation to enhance visual function in patients with hemianopia: a comparative case study. PM R 2011; 3: 825–835. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.05.026. PMID: 21944300.

Matteo B.M., Viganò B., Cerri C.G. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with blindsight rehabilitation for the treatment of homonymous hemianopia: a report of two-cases. J Phys Ther Sci 2017; 29: 1700–1705. DOI: 10.1589/jpts.29.1700. PMID: 28932016.

Larcombe S.J., Kulyomina Y., Antonova N. et al. Visual training in hemianopia alters neural activity in the absence of behavioural improvement: a pilot study. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2018; 38: 538–549. DOI: 10.1111/opo.12584. PMID: 30357899

Mangione C.M., Lee P.P., Gutierrez P.R. et al. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119: 1050–1058. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.119.7.1050. PMID: 11448327.

Мочалова А.С. Качество жизни пациентов при различных вариантах лечения меланомы хориоидеи: дис. … канд. мед. наук. Челябинск, 2014. 128 с.

Новик А.А., Ионова Т.И. Руководство по исследованию качества жизни в медицине. М.: ОЛМА Медиа Групп, 2007. 313 с.

Antal A., Alekseichuk I., Bikson M. et al. Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128: 1774–1809. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001. PMID: 28709880.

Antal A., Kincses T.Z., Nitsche M.A., Paulus W. Manipulation of phosphene thresholds by transcranial direct current stimulation in man. Exp Brain Res 2003; 150: 375–378. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-003-1459-8. PMID: 12698316.

Antal A., Kincses T.Z., Nitsche M.A. et al. Excitability changes induced in the human primary visual cortex by transcranial direct current stimulation: direct electrophysiological evidence. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004; 45: 702–707. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.03-0688. PMID: 14744917.

Kraft A., Roehmel J., Olma M.C. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation affects visual perception measured by threshold perimetry. Exp Brain Res 2010; 207: 283–290. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2453-6. PMID: 21046369.

Costa T.L., Gualtieri M., Barboni M.T. et al. Contrasting effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on central and peripheral visual fields. Exp Brain Res 2015; 233: 1391–1397. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-015-4213-0. PMID: 25650104.

Behrens J.R., Kraft A., Irlbacher K. et al. Long-lasting enhancement of visual perception with repetitive noninvasive transcranial direct current stimulation. Front Cell Neurosci 2017; 11: 238. DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2017.00238. PMID: 28860969.

Matteo B.M., Vigano B., Cerri C.G., Perin C. Visual field restorative rehabilitation after brain injury. J Vis 2016; 16: 11. DOI: 10.1167/16.9.11. PMID: 27472498.

Morland A.B., Le S., Carroll E. et al. The role of spared calcarine cortex and lateral occipital cortex in the responses of human hemianopes to visual motion. J Cogn Neurosci 2004; 16: 204–218. DOI: 10.1162/089892904322984517. PMID: 15068592.

Chokron S., Perez C., Peyrin C. Behavioral consequences and cortical reorganization in homonymous hemianopia. Front Syst Neurosci 2016; 10: 57. DOI: 10.3389/fnsys.2016.00057. PMID: 27445717.

Fendrich R., Wessinger C.M., Gazzaniga M.S. Speculations on the neural basis of islands of blindsight. Prog Brain Res 2001; 134: 353–366. DOI: 10.1016/s0079-6123(01)34023-2. PMID: 11702554.

Eysel U.T., Schweigart G. Increased receptive field size in the surround of chronic lesions in the adult cat visual cortex. Cereb Cortex 1999; 9: 101–109. DOI: 10.1016/s0304-3940(02)01153-9. PMID: 12531465.

Pleger B., Foerster A.F., Widdig W. et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging mirrors recovery of visual perception after repetitive tachistoscopic stimulation in patients with partial cortical blindness. Neurosci Lett 2003; 335: 192–196.

Nelles G., Widman G., de Greiff A. et al. Brain representation of hemifield stimulation in poststroke visual field defects. Stroke 2002; 33: 1286–1293. PMID: 11988605.

Nelles G., de Greiff A., Pscherer A. et al. Cortical activation in hemianopia after stroke. Neurosci Lett 2007; 426: 34–38. PMID: 17881128.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.25692/ACEN.2020.2.1