Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
NeuroRehabilitation ; 45(3): 323-329, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31796693

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and Repetitive facilitative exercise (RFE) improves motor impairment after stroke. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) can facilitate the effects of rTMS and RFE on the function of the hemiparetic hand in stroke patients. METHODS: This randomized double-blinded crossover study divided 20 patients with hemiparesis into two groups and provided treatment for 4 weeks at 5 days/week. NMES-before-sham group and NMES-following-sham group performed NMES sessions and sham NMES sessions for each 2 weeks. Patients received NMES or sham NMES for the affected extensor muscle concurrently with 1 Hz rTMS for the unaffected motor cortex for 10 min and performed RFE for 60 min. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Box and Block Test (BBT) and Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) were used for evaluation. RESULTS: FMA and ARAT improved significantly during both sessions. The gains in the BBT during an NMES session were significantly greater than those during a sham NMES session. MAS for the wrist and finger significantly decreased only during an NMES session. CONCLUSIONS: NMES combined with rTMS might facilitate, at least in part, the beneficial effects of RFE on motor function and spasticity of the affected upper limb.


Asunto(s)
Terapia por Ejercicio/métodos , Mano , Paresia/rehabilitación , Rehabilitación de Accidente Cerebrovascular/métodos , Estimulación Transcraneal de Corriente Directa/métodos , Estimulación Magnética Transcraneal/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Terapia Combinada/métodos , Terapia Combinada/tendencias , Estudios Cruzados , Método Doble Ciego , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/métodos , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/tendencias , Terapia por Ejercicio/tendencias , Femenino , Mano/fisiopatología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Paresia/fisiopatología , Distribución Aleatoria , Accidente Cerebrovascular/complicaciones , Rehabilitación de Accidente Cerebrovascular/tendencias , Estimulación Transcraneal de Corriente Directa/tendencias , Estimulación Magnética Transcraneal/tendencias , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
J Control Release ; 172(3): 1045-64, 2013 Dec 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24096014

RESUMEN

With countless research papers using preclinical models and showing the superiority of nanoparticle design over current drug therapies used to treat cancers, it is surprising how deficient the translation of these nano-sized drug carriers into the clinical setting is. This review article seeks to compare the preclinical and clinical results for Doxil®, PK1, Abraxane®, Genexol-PM®, Xyotax™, NC-6004, Mylotarg®, PK2, and CALAA-01. While not comprehensive, it covers nano-sized drug carriers designed to improve the efficacy of common drugs used in chemotherapy. While not always available or comparable, effort was made to compare the pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and efficacy between the animal and human studies. Discussion is provided to suggest what might be causing the gap. Finally, suggestions and encouragement are dispensed for the potential that nano-sized drug carriers hold.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Portadores de Fármacos/química , Sistemas de Liberación de Medicamentos/métodos , Nanoestructuras/química , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Animales , Antineoplásicos/farmacocinética , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Portadores de Fármacos/metabolismo , Portadores de Fármacos/toxicidad , Evaluación Preclínica de Medicamentos , Humanos , Modelos Moleculares , Nanoestructuras/toxicidad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA