Skip Navigation


Brain Advance Access originally published online on December 15, 2004
Brain 2005 128(2):386-394; doi:10.1093/brain/awh366
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
128/2/386    most recent
awh366v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (18)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cruccu, G.
Right arrow Articles by Hopf, H. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cruccu, G.
Right arrow Articles by Hopf, H. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Brain Vol. 128 No. 2 © Guarantors of Brain 2004; all rights reserved

Brainstem reflex circuits revisited

G. Cruccu1, G. D. Iannetti2, J. J. Marx3, F. Thoemke3, A. Truini1, S. Fitzek4, F. Galeotti1, P. P. Urban3, A. Romaniello1, P. Stoeter3, M. Manfredi1 and H. C. Hopf3

1 Department of Neurological Sciences, ‘La Sapienza’ University, Rome, Italy, 2 Department of Human Anatomy and Genetics and FMRIB Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, 3 Department of Neurology and Department of Neuroradiology, ‘Johannes Gutenberg’ University, Mainz, Germany and 4 Department of Neurology, ‘Friedrich Schiller’ University, Jena, Germany

Correspondence to: Prof. Giorgio Cruccu, Dipartimento Scienze Neurologiche, Viale Università 30, 00185 Roma, Italy E-mail: cruccu{at}uniroma1.it

Our current understanding of brainstem reflex physiology comes chiefly from the classic anatomical–functional correlation studies that traced the central circuits underlying brainstem reflexes and establishing reflex abnormalities as markers for specific areas of lesion. These studies nevertheless had the disadvantage of deriving from post-mortem findings in only a few patients. We developed a voxel-based model of the human brainstem designed to import and normalize MRIs, select groups of patients with or without a given dysfunction, compare their MRIs statistically, and construct three-plane maps showing the statistical probability of lesion. Using this method, we studied 180 patients with focal brainstem infarction. All subjects underwent a dedicated MRI study of the brainstem and the whole series of brainstem tests currently used in clinical neurophysiology: early (R1) and late (R2) blink reflex, early (SP1) and late (SP2) masseter inhibitory reflex, and the jaw jerk to chin tapping. Significance levels were highest for R1, SP1 and R2 afferent abnormalities. Patients with abnormalities in all three reflexes had lesions involving the primary sensory neurons in the ventral pons, before the afferents directed to the respective reflex circuits diverge. Patients with an isolated abnormality of R1 and SP1 responses had lesions that involved the ipsilateral dorsal pons, near the fourth ventricle floor, and lay close to each other. The area with the highest probabilities of lesion for the R2-afferent abnormality was in the ipsilateral dorsal–lateral medulla at the inferior olive level. SP2 abnormalities reached a low level of significance, in the same region as R2. Only few patients had a crossed-type abnormality of SP1, SP2 or R2; that of SP1 reached significance in the median pontine tegmentum rostral to the main trigeminal nucleus. Although abnormal in 38 patients, the jaw jerk appeared to have no cluster location. Because our voxel-based model quantitatively compares lesions in patients with or without a given reflex abnormality, it minimizes the risk that the significant areas depict vascular territories rather than common spots within the territory housing the reflex circuit. By analysing statistical data for a large cohort of patients, it also identifies the most frequent lesion location for each response. The finding of multireflex abnormalities reflects damage of the primary afferent neurons; hence it provides no evidence of an intra-axial lesion. The jaw jerk, perhaps the brainstem reflex most widely used in clinical neurophysiology, had no apparent topodiagnostic value, probably because it depends strongly on peripheral variables, including dental occlusion.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. PsychiatryHome page
L. Bonanni, F. Anzellotti, S. Varanese, A. Thomas, L. Manzoli, and M. Onofrj
Delayed blink reflex in dementia with Lewy bodies
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, October 1, 2007; 78(10): 1137 - 1139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NeurologyHome page
M. Obermann, M-S Yoon, D. Ese, M. Maschke, H. Kaube, H-C Diener, and Z. Katsarava
Impaired trigeminal nociceptive processing in patients with trigeminal neuralgia
Neurology, August 28, 2007; 69(9): 835 - 841.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NeurologyHome page
G. Cruccu, A. Biasiotta, F. Galeotti, G. D. Iannetti, A. Truini, and G. Gronseth
Diagnostic accuracy of trigeminal reflex testing in trigeminal neuralgia
Neurology, January 10, 2006; 66(1): 139 - 141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.