PoNS and CP was studed in Russia :

PoNS and CP was studed in Russia :

https://heliusmedical.com/index.php/newsroom/news-release/2016/34-helius-medical-technologies-announces-publication-of-positive-results-of-russian-pediatric-cerebral-palsy-pilot-study

the latest 2019 study of PoNS:

https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-019-0538-4

Officially was published only this yet:

(So just 1-2 November 2018 this cp study was presented to international Congress in Moscow )

If you want to see more -what I posted before read my this article: http://brain-injury-hope.com/category/pons-and-device-to-help-cranial-nerve-non-invasive-neuromodulation-cn-ninm/

But not officially we can find more ( if we can read in Russian 😉 and here link:

http://www.vniifk.ru/content/files/dissovet/deineko/dissertaciya_deineko_vv.pdf

Ok this is not yet “official” publication from St Petersbourg where they did CP study for PoNS was done. According to the thesis the situation was not very good ( because author used datas of this study without permission).

Daineko Vadim, is not a doctor, during the practice an instructor without permission of the copyright holders he used the data for his scientific thesis.

Brainport is mentioned in his thesis because from the very beginning they started working with him, and then switched to PoNS. This is a typical mistake in Russia to confuse these devices; but on photos you can see they used PoNS for study. ( old version of PoNS)

But of cause I can’t guarantee that in this thesis will be not others “mistakes” as at any case it’s not official publication yet of this Russian Cp study with PoNS.

So this is not yet officially published data for this study.

Comparison of TR ( traditional rehabilitations) and VTR ( high-tech rehabilitation) groups has shown that VTR has a significantly more significant therapeutic effect in comparison with TR and contributes to a significant development of motor functions.

So it’s comparison of 2 groups:

1) The traditional program of rehabilitation TR group: of children with cerebral palsy (exercise therapy, physiotherapy, hydrokinesiotherapy, therapeutic massage)= all “standard therapies” but intensive for CP

2) VTR group : and the VTR program with the use of high-tech rehabilitation tools (so they also had exercise therapy, physiotherapy, hydrokinesiotherapy, therapeutic massage)= all “standard therapies” but intensive for CP and plus High -technology: Lokomat, Armeo, PoNS)

The obtained therapeutic effect is connected with the application of a complex of high-tech means of neurorehabilitation, providing stimulation of motor centers of the brain and contributing to the more intensive development of compensatory mechanisms.

The final step was a comparison of the therapeutic effects according to the classification scale of movement.

In both groups, the baseline values before treatment improved significantly after the rehabilitation course, but a more pronounced therapeutic effect occurred in the high-tech treatment group.

On the basis of their own observations, children undergoing high-tech treatment were more confident in traveling long distances, climbing independently after falls, overcoming obstacles.

This rehabilitative effect is obviously related to more deep impact of modern high-tech devices on the motor centers of the brain, skeletal muscles and proprioreceptors.

The results of comparing the therapeutic effects of TP and VTR showed that both treatments in children with cerebral palsy have a positive effect on motor function, muscle tone, and balance.

However, VTR has a more pronounced therapeutic effect, especially on the maintenance of vertical position, independent walking and fine motor skills of hands.

The traditional program of rehabilitation TR group: of children with cerebral palsy (exercise therapy, physiotherapy, hydrokinesiotherapy, therapeutic massage)

and the VTR program with the use of high-tech rehabilitation tools (same as TR + Lokomat, Armeo, PoNS)

But in VTR group they had significantly bigger effects in improving balance and walking, reducing spasticity of the upper and lower extremities.

The achieved rehabilitation effects are preserved for six months with continued rehabilitation on an outpatient basis in the variants of individual exercises, hippotherapy and Nordic walking.

The rehabilitation program with the use of high-tech tools (VTR) in comparison with the traditional program of rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy, has significant advantages in rehabilitation effects that increase the child’s physical activity, as measured by the Berg scale (balance), Ashworth scales for upper and lower extremities (spasticity) , GMFCS scale (motor functions) and classification scale of movement.

http://www.vniifk.ru/content/files/dissovet/deineko/dissertaciya_deineko_vv.pdf

So why Hbot works not always same way in brain injury?

So why Hbot works not always same way in children’s? I am not a doctor I am just a mum like you so please I do analyze my son injury I read a lot but I am not a doctor ( take it just only mum reflection on subject) ok?

It’s very difficult question and I think even best Hbot doctors don’t know exact answer honestly

Let’s say : first of all each brain injury is unique and diferent.

I am trying just analyzing what I can as dates but as I said with anoxic brain injuries we don’t have any studies with spect scans so all this discussion just my personal suppositions ok ?

Ok i post mri of Marc before Hbot and after 80h

We have MRI in January 2016 just some days after anoxic injury

And we have MRI June 2017 after 80h Hbot … but without general anesthesia ( so some artifacts)

Be my guest if any radiology specialist want to make professional hole comparison

1. I think Age of child in the moment of injury play very big role : of child very small ( new born or HIE child for example) smaller is a child at brain injury more fragile his brain ( so same 25 minutes without oxygen will be more devastating on smallest child brain at birth or 1 month age than at 4 years old)

Second why age is important – because if child was already walking / full functioning child before brain injury -so after it will be retraining of his lost functions wile in new born it will be just training ( with less neurons in brain) I think it’s more difficult. But it’s just my opinion.

2. Of cause most important factor : it’s volume of Brain which was damaged!!!!

While there is no way of knowing how much recoverable tissue exists in the days, weeks, and years following brain injury , HBOT can increase cell reproduction and administer oxygen to tissue that was previously cut off from blood flow. The dormant cells surrounding the damaged tissue area, also known as ischemic penumbra, are responsible for much of post-stroke dysfunction. If oxygen therapy can revive these cells, lost functionality may return to the individual.

And this you can say only by MRI and Spect. But again for small children’s I am sorry but MRI don’t give exact informations ( that’s why neurologists don’t like to do MRI for cp children’s too early age …. we can really see at age 4-5 years but before it’s very difficult).

But still : Qualitative assessment of brainstem injury on T1 and T2 images in neonates with HIE may provide information on injury severity and risk of death, but objective quantitative data such as ADC values are lacking. ( if you want to read about read this study:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/28686592/

These infratentorial areas have high concentrations of excitatory neurotransmitters (e.g., glutamate) and are especially vulnerable to the profound hypoxia-ischemia that is typical in HIE. The cerebellum acts as a satellite system of established cortico-basal ganglia networks in neonates.

If we talk about MRI of my child ( he had basal ganglia

and thalamus damages) …

In one large study cohort, 60% to 70% of infants who sustained moderate basal ganglia/thalamic injury had cerebral palsy and 35% had developmental quotient less than 70 (40). Cerebral palsy was identified in 98% of infants with severe basal ganglia/thalamic injury 

Before Hbot:

I will post his MRI ( after Hbot a bit father in this article ok?)

3. So here we come fore 3d factor : did child was cooled after brain injury???? I believe that it’s helped to my child ( yes his body temperature was cooled it’s protocol for cardiac arrest but not always for HIE ).

4. Did child had 100% oxygen or just 30% oxygen delivery as Normobaric ? It’s may be has also role to play i think.

( it’s after reading this book I think about )

This lecture is also really good explanation why Hbot is better ( than Normobaric oxygen) we get oxygen in plasma! Lisen at 44minutes :

https://youtu.be/z6qy1hq2zqM

( and by the way I agree about multiple approach with Sherr – before starting Hbot in Israel’s for my son – we did batteries of blood tests and also tubes in ears – in order to protect them against barotraumatisme).

5. And you see naw what I think about Hbot ( we don’t have real agreement between doctors what is the best protocol for brain injury – and what kind brain injury ? By the way ?) TBI or anoxic? ). Parents has some possibilities: 1,5ata 100% oxygen is most used in hard chambers by centers ( sometimes is more pressure but honestly it’s the mostly use regiment for nerology in hard chambers) and I believe that in case of my son really oxygen in Hbot made biggest changes but as I posted before in Hbot conditions contrary to Normobaric 100% oxygen…

« We found that HBO, but not NBO, reduced oxygen and glucose deprivation-induced cell injury, indicating that passive tissue oxygenation (i.e. without vascular support) of the brain parenchyma requires oxygen partial pressure higher than 1 ATA. »

More about read my post in blog:

http://brain-injury-hope.com/2019/04/normobaric-or-hyperbaric/

About other possibilitiy: 1,3ata without oxygen

Of cause first of all it’s the most “ not risky “ protocol for very injured children’s so may be also that’s why a lot doctors prefer start really very-law presssure ( case child brain really very damaged) and if child very small -very fragile.

So do the 1,3ata without oxygen will give same results for anoxic injury as 1,5ata 100% oxygen??? I don’t know 🤷‍♀️

I believe that in acute period use oxygen after anoxic injury just after it is more beneficial than without oxygen….. but it’s consern acute period 2-6-8 months after injury!!!!)

( I am not talking about CP-ok it’s chronic condition already) this we was discussed in study which compared pressures for cp.

http://brain-injury-hope.com/2019/01/study-which-compares-different-pressures-for-cp-in-hbot/

So hope my reflections helps….

So for Marc Sudden cardiac arrest happens to my baby at 4 years old. Because of not diagnosed WPW.

He has cardiac arrest for 25 minutes

I did cpr with fiend ambulance was only after 20 minutes and his heart restarted only after 25 minutes…

He was on the hyperthermic protocol ( cooled)

His child body went through so much:

5 days comas

Blindness for 3 days after coma

He couldn’t talk at all for 2 weeks after ( and restarted very slowly to talk some words)

Wasn’t sitting for 1 month and we was 1 month in Intensive care unit and 4 months in hospital

He had 5 ablations ( for his heart syndrome in 3 years)

He was obliged to learn to do everything again… ( he was just 4 years boy when he has to pass through all this: When My son woke from life support after rewarming his body He had regular heard surveys 24h/24 because of regular SVT , kidney failure, respiratory failure & and he was on a feeding tube as well…. and he was blind and can’t talk….. but constantly crying…..only thing which calm his down a bit was my voice …

He has no memory of what happened but he has PTSD

He couldn’t feed himself

couldn’t stand

couldn’t walk

couldn’t do anything

We passed by phases : wheelchair and walker and he hate both of them….

But yes I am blessed that he is alive.

MRI’s after 80 hours Hbot in Israel:

Videos

M’y son Marc avant hbot juin 2016( main gauche)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xI4eNE6pSWY_pgeUgwJ1jXN-W59n-CDB/view?usp=drivesdk

Après 50 hbot: (septembre 2016)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yqiFsZ8pGkyapTPBY3qJ4bjUA9D7pOr7/view?usp=drivesdk

Hbot

right – before hbot 1 July 2016

Left – after 15 hours hbot -5 August 2016

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MX_yGrATtTkk6_fxWmp4q-ARvPqNQXv5/view?usp=drivesdk

PoNS: (started 29 March 2018)

Stairs before Pons (right vidéo septembre 2017)

After 6 months pons (left -September 2018)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HBrzFIQ1TA35lQVTAKlux2hz0sxiplZP/view?usp=drivesdk

Pons 6 mois ( left -June 2018/ right – September 2018)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ut7jH8NyZFKG4Dv-4HV96qqBJoVGP1W6/view?usp=drivesdk

pons

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lvvXrBIKLPVdt76JGljWe3Vr46sm8mWp/view?usp=drivesdk

Stoped using pons from 30 December 2018

So 2 AQM without pons:

AQM 1:(11 January 2019)

Aqm2( 28 January 2019)

Restarted using pons in Russia clinic : 11 February (2 weeks intensive in Moscow clinic with pons): http://brain-injury-hope.com/2019/02/pons-2-clinic-near-moscow/

Aqm 3 (25 February )

I will do 4th AQM in September -October 2019 so hopefully I will get scientific datas for PoNS long therm use ….

If you want more read:

http://brain-injury-hope.com/my-sudden-cardiac-arrest-survivor/

Haw about being accepted by friends in school for « special » children’s ?

I will tell you my point of vue on this question :

Marc has a lot of friends

But honestly I did maximum in order to get all children’s and parents «  on my sight «  after Marc accsident at the beginning it was not obvious …

It’s exactly what I am doing :

Social life is very very important target so during 2 years II worked for this goal for Marc

I see results this year …( I have a chance because I am « not working mum » but in fact I do my job exactly this way : who can invite 5-6 neurological normal friends at home every week and play with them during 3-4 hours per day????….. so I am not working mum who do it for my child… i think I invest better than any proffecionel in this point….)

But I need professionals in parts I can’t do… 😉

Others parents don’t want to do efforts for your child ( or at least not much who will do)

It’s like this

It’s reality

When you know this and do all yourself without counting on them everything is easygoing…

And if it’s interesting to come to your home to theirs children’s they will ask to come from their parents and so … you will start invite for weekend for cake and coffee …. so you start create sosial links with parents and children’s….

Just don’t wait that they will invite you in reteurn

It’s will be always you who will do much more than others parents 😉

Yes it’s the best motivation for my son Marc so that’s why I do my own “friends” programm and every week planing ( yes you need to send messages /phone calls in order to plan 5-6 invitations per week).

Often parents they don’t have time / motivation to play with theirs children’s at home ( I do have this time and my hasbend is playing with kids just exeptional during weekends ! They love to play with him)

I know 11 children’s from his class and parents and we continue doing new friends of cause absolutely!

(so well I know to play with them in social games somtimes can be very boring for adults and we as parents somtimes wants just to rest I know all this! ) I have à chance naw Marc can a bit play just alone between children’s but it wasn’t so evident 2 years ago …

and yes somtimes I am inviting 2 his best friends ( boys) to sleep at home so we can have pyjamas parties 😉 and dansing 😉

Yes I will tell you it’s a lot of job /coking/playing

But it’s worth 😉

But you can’t imagine what I feel this year when children’s I don’t know yet from his class comme to me and ask : “ please can you invite me to eat with Marc?” I am also in his clas I am his friend”… and so – I ask marc” hey you know this boy you want invite him home?”

And his pleasure to tel me yes I want yes he is playing with me at school ….or So other day “mum can you invite this boy …etc…”

This is really cool feeling….

A lot of job but so cool!

🙂

It is a long way but it’s worth !

AS said it took me 2 years to get back Marc socialisation after his Sudden Cardiac Arrest.

I started with 2 best friends invited regulary at home ( for 2-3 hours) – weekend.

Than I started to invite friends to eat with Marc at home during lunches ( it’s of cause me who organize all I am going to school taking children’s / make them eat together and playing – and bring them back to school) – parents need only tell to school that they give me permission to take their children’s for lunch ( so not much trouble for other parents or any trouble for their daily plans)

Naw I am in fact : at level 3 lunches per week ( every time I invite only one friend )

And Friday evening – very often he is playing with friends ( after school)

And 2 others children’s for 4 hours invited to play each Saturday and Sunday !

Yah planing for Ministry of Foreign Affaires has less appointments 😉

( exept week-end we travel of cause)

So 6 friends per week!

It’s a real job I have 😉

Kids club

But it’s so worth it!

And if you know haw Marc is happy to has all his friends !

Normobaric or Hyperbaric?

1)Hyperbaric oxygen and hyperbaric air treatment result in comparable neuronal death reduction and improved behavioral outcome after transient forebrain ischemia in the gerbil:

« hyperbaric oxygen may represent a potentially important therapeutic option for post-arrest encephalopathy as well as other forms of brain injury. We also agree that animal studies of global brain ischemia suggest that hyperbaric oxygen may be beneficial with regard to neurologic outcome »

Anoxic brain injury resulting from cardiac arrest is responsible for approximately two-thirds of deaths. Recent evidence suggests that increased oxygen delivered to the brain after cardiac arrest may be an important factor in preventing neuronal damage, resulting in an interest in hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) therapy. Interestingly, increased oxygen supply may be also reached by application of normobaric oxygen (NBO) or hyperbaric air (HBA). However, previous research also showed that the beneficial effect of hyperbaric treatment may not directly result from increased oxygen supply, leading to the conclusion that the mechanism of hyperbaric prevention of brain damage is not well understood. The aim of our study was to compare the effects of HBO, HBA and NBO treatment on gerbil brain condition after transient forebrain ischemia, serving as a model of cardiac arrest.

Source :

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234042951_Hyperbaric_oxygen_and_hyperbaric_air_treatment_result_in_comparable_neuronal_death_reduction_and_improved_behavioral_outcome_after_transient_forebrain_ischemia_in_the_gerbil

2. this one also :Effects of normobaric versus hyperbaric oxygen on cell injury induced by oxygen and glucose deprivation in acute brain slices

« We found that HBO, but not NBO, reduced oxygen and glucose deprivation-induced cell injury, indicating that passive tissue oxygenation (i.e. without vascular support) of the brain parenchyma requires oxygen partial pressure higher than 1 ATA. »

https://www.google.fr/amp/s/www.researchgate.net/publication/308753914_Effects_of_normobaric_versus_hyperbaric_oxygen_on_cell_injury_induced_by_oxygen_and_glucose_deprivation_in_acute_brain_slices/amp