Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
The clinical assessment of patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) relies on the observation of behavioural responses to standardised sensory stimulation. However, several medical comorbidities may directly impair the production of reproducible and appropriate responses, thus reducing the sensitivity of behaviour-based diagnoses. One such comorbidity is akinetic mutism (AM), a rare neurological syndrome characterised by the inability to initiate volitional motor responses, sometimes associated with clinical presentations that overlap with those of DoC. In this paper, we describe the case of a patient with large bilateral mesial frontal lesions, showing prolonged behavioural unresponsiveness and severe disorganisation of electroencephalographic (EEG) background, compatible with a vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/UWS). By applying an unprecedented multimodal battery of advanced imaging and electrophysiology-based techniques (AIE) encompassing spontaneous EEG, evoked potentials, event-related potentials, transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with EEG and structural and functional MRI, we provide the following: (i) a demonstration of the preservation of consciousness despite unresponsiveness in the context of AM, (ii) a plausible neurophysiological explanation for behavioural unresponsiveness and its subsequent recovery during rehabilitation stay and (iii) novel insights into the relationships between DoC, AM and parkinsonism. The present case offers proof-of-principle evidence supporting the clinical utility of a multimodal hierarchical workflow that combines AIEs to detect covert signs of consciousness in unresponsive patients.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.