SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Effect of Zolpidem in the Aftermath of Traumatic Brain Injury: An MEG Study.

Case Rep Neurol Med · 2020-03-20

DOI: 10.1155/2020/8597062PMID: 32257474

Open accessJournal Article; Case Reports; case-reportOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

In the past two decades, many studies have shown the paradoxical efficacy of zolpidem, a hypnotic used to induce sleep, in transiently alleviating various disorders of consciousness such as traumatic brain injury (TBI), dystonia, and Parkinson's disease. The mechanism of action of this effect of zolpidem is of great research interest. In this case study, we use magnetoencephalography (MEG) to investigate a fully conscious, ex-coma patient who suffered from neurological difficulties for a few years due to traumatic brain injury. For a few years after injury, the patient was under medication with zolpidem that drastically improved his symptoms. MEG recordings taken before and after zolpidem showed a reduction in power in the theta-alpha (4-12 Hz) and lower beta (15-20 Hz) frequency bands. An increase in power after zolpidem intake was found in the higher beta/lower gamma (20-43 Hz) frequency band. Source level functional connectivity measured using weighted-phase lag index showed changes after zolpidem intake. Stronger connectivity between left frontal and temporal brain regions was observed. We report that zolpidem induces a change in MEG resting power and functional connectivity in the patient. MEG is an informative and sensitive tool to detect changes in brain activity for TBI.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.