Rodinsky A. G., Pysarevskay K. V., Chobitok L. A.

LITERATURE REVIEWS

Scentific article

Because of increase in problem states in a large number of newborns, there is a growing need for early diagnosis of brain damage in children who were underwent severe hypoxia who were received prolonged respiratory therapy, since perinatal hypoxic ischemia is one of the main causes of brain damage to newborns. This article gives more attention to this issue. First of all, this concerns the disclosure of the pathogenesis of hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, which makes it possible to identify the features of the development of this disease, as well as its possible consequences: (cerebral palsy, attention deficit, hyperactivity disorder, epilepsy, etc.). Scientific novelty: quantitative criteria will be proposed for assessing the severity of hypoxic lesions of the central nervous system, in terms of the electrical activity of the brain. It will be evaluated at what initial values of electrical brain activity in children with posthypoxic lesions have a risk of developing neurological abnormalities of the central nervous system; also an assessment of the risks of disability will be carried out in order to improve the quality of life of children. The main cause of brain damage in the fetus and newborn is hypoxia, which can develop under conditions unfavourable for the course of pregnancy, like asphyxia, and also can be accompany birth trauma, hemolytic disease of the newborn, infectious and other diseases of the fetus and newborn. The hemodynamic and metabolic disturbances that arise under conditions of hypoxia can lead to the development of hypoxic-ischemic lesions of the brain substance and intracranial hemorrhages. In recent years, great attention in the etiology of perinatal lesions of the central nervous system belongs to intrauterine infections. The mechanical factor in perinatal brain damage loses its prevalence. The main cause of lesions of the spinal cord is based on traumatic factors as a result of obstetric manipulation in conditions of large fetal mass, etc.

hypoxia, hypoxic-ischemic lesions of the central nervous system, ischemic encephalopathy, electroencephalography, electroencephalogram (EEG).

1. Kosenkova TV, Shchelkova OYu, Ovchinnikov BV. Osobennosti povedencheskoy regulyatsii u yunoshey, perenosshikh perinatal’noye gipoksicheskoye porazheniye TSNS. Vestnik SGMA. 2015;14(3):67-73. [in Russian].
2. Sal’kov BH, Levchenkova VD. Osobennosti neyrooftal’mologicheskoy simptomatiki u detey s detskim tserebral’nym paralichom. Materialy 7-oy mezhregion. nauchn.-praktich. konf. «Aktual’nyye voprosy nevrologii». Novosibirsk: 2009. s. 44-8. [in Russian].
3. Kozhushko NYu. Vozrastnyye osobennosti formirovaniya bioelektricheskoy aktivnosti mozga u detey s otdalonnymi posledstviyami perinatal’nogo gipoksicheskogo porazheniya TSNS. Fiziologiya cheloveka. 2007;1:5-14. [in Russian].
4. Kosenkova TV, Yeliseyeva IN, Gombalevskaya MS. Vliyaniye posledstviy perinatal’nogo porazheniya TSNS na formirovaniye agressivnogo povedeniya v detskom vozraste. Materialy rossiyskogo foruma «Pediatriya Sankt-Peterburga: opyt innovatsii, dostizheniya». SPb.: 2011. s. 41-57. [in Russian].
5. Pal’chik AB, Shabalov NP. Gipoksicheski-ishemicheskaya entsefalopatiya novorozhdennykh. MEDpress inform. M.: 2009. s. 253. [in Russian].
6. Badawi N, Kurinczuk JJ, Keogh JM, Alessandri LM. Anterpartum risk factors for newborn encephalopathy: the Western Australian case-control study. B.M.J. 2008;317:1549-53.
7. Pin TW, Eldridge B, Galea MP. A review of developmental outcomes of term infants with postasphyxia neonatal encephalopathy. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2009 May;13(3):224-34.
8. Volodin NN, Medvedev MI, Rogatkin SO. Novyye podkhody k diagnostike perinatal’nykh porazheniy nervnoy sistemy u detey pervogo goda zhizni i ikh klassifikatsiya. Tekst. Pediatriya. 2008;1:5-9. [in Russian].
9. Sal’kov VN. Morphological changes of primary visual cortex (area 17) at perinatal brain lesion. New horizons in pediatric neurology, neurosurgery and neurofibromatosis. Eliat, Israel; 2009. p. 235-6.
10. Kutin VA, D’yakonova YeN. Funktsional’nyye i ul’trazvukovyye metody issledovaniya v prakticheskoy meditsine. Tekst. Ivanovo: IPK «PresSto»; 2009. s. 78-86. [in Russian].
11. Hebebrand J. A genome-wide scan for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in 155 German sib-pairs. Text. Molecular Psychiatry. 2006;11:196-205.
12. Chabot R, Serfontein G. Qualitative electroencephalographic profiles of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Text. Boil. Psychiatry. 1996;40:951-63.
13. Mikhaylichenko NV. Sindrom defitsita vnimaniya s giperaktivnost’yu u detey. Tekst. Ros. vestn. perinatologii i pediatrii. 2001;46(3):46-9. [in Russian].
14. Foreman DM. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: legal and ethical aspects. Text. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 2006;91:192-4.
15. Volodin NN. Perinatal’naya meditsina: problemy, puti i usloviya ikh resheniya. Tekst. Pediatricheskiy zhurn. im. G.N. Speranskogo. 2008;5:1823. [in Russian].
16. Lobanova LV, Zubareva YeA, Ulezko YeA. Dopplerografiya v neyrosonografii. Tekst. Neyrosonografiya u detey rannego vozrasta. Minsk: Paradoks; 2004. Gl. 8. s. 117-46. [in Russian].
17. Benis HA, Samsonova TV. Kliniko-funktsional’naya kharakteristika nedonoshennykh detey s ekstremal’no-nizkoy i ochen’ nizkoy massoy tela pri rozhdenii i razlichnymi srokami gestatsii. Detskaya meditsina Severo-Zapada. 2012;1:26-9. [in Russian].
18. Zenkov LR. Klinicheskaya elektroentsefalografiya (s elementami epileptologii). Rukovodstvo dlya vrachey. M.: MEDpressinform; 2011. s. 368. [in Russian].
19. Kosenkova TV, Fedorova YeA, Ovchinnikov BV. Osobennosti sotsial’no-psikhologicheskoy adaptatsii yunoshey prizyvnogo vozrasta s posledstviyami perinatal’nogo porazheniya TSNS. Vestnik SPbGMA im. I.I. Mechnikova. 2012;2:96-102. [in Russian].
20. Chopp M, Chan PH, Hsu CY, Cheung ME, Jacobs TP. DNA damage and repair in central nervous system injury. National Institute. 2015. р. 78-82.
21. Sal’kov VN, Khudoyerkov PM, Levchenkova VD. Faktory riska i posledstviya perinatal’nogo povrezhdeniya TSNS. Arkh. pat. 2009;71(2):42-7. [in Russian].
22. Hadders-Algra M, Huisjies HJ, Touwen BCL. Perinatal correlates of major and minor neurological dysfunction at school age: a multivariate analisis. Develop. Med. Child Neurology. 2009;30:472-81.
23. Koval’chuk-Kovalevskaya OV, Yevsyukova II. Ispol’zovaniye neyroprotektsii v lechenii novorozhdennykh detey s zaderzhkoy funktsional’nogo razvitiya TSNS. Pediatriya. 2012. s. 129-34. [in Russian].
24. Blagosklonova HK, Novikova LA. Detskaya klinicheskaya elektroentsefalografiya. M.: Meditsina; 2008. s. 164. [in Russian].
25. Levene MI, Chervenak FA. Fetal and neonatal neurology and neurosurgery. Elsevier Health Sciences. 2009. Р. 921.
26. Derevyagin VI, Levchenkova VD, Sheynkman OG, Sal’kov VN. Strukturno-funktsional’nyye sopostavleniya pri detskom tserebral’nom paraliche. Materialy Vseross. konf. s mezhdunarod. uchastiyem «Sovremennyye napravleniya issledovaniy funktsional’noy mezhpolusharnoy asimmetrii i plastichnosti mozga». Novosibirsk: 2010. s. 581-4. [in Russian].
27. Mukhtarova SN. Znacheniye opredeleniya neyrospetsificheskoy enolazy v otsenke tyazhesti gipoksicheski-ishemicheskikh porazheniy mozga u novorozhdennykh. Meditsinskiye novosti Gruzii. 2010;4(181):49-54. [in Russian].
28. Levchenkova VD, Matveyeva IA, Politova IYa, Sal’kov VN. Rannyaya simptomatika detskogo tserebral’nogo paralicha i vosstanovitel’noye lecheniye v etot period zabolevaniya. Materialy II mezhdunarod. kongressa «Neyroreabilitatsiya». M.; 2010. s. 15. [in Russian].
29. Kosenkova TV, Fedorova YeA. Osobennosti emotsional’no-volevoy sfery yunoshey, perenosshikh perinatal’noye porazheniye TSNS gipoksicheskogo geneza, na etape podgotovki k voyennoy sluzhbe. Teoreticheskiye i prikladnyye problemy klinicheskoy psikhologii. Vserossiyskaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferentsiya. SPb.: 2011. s. 240-1. [in Russian].
30. Sal’kov VN. Disfunktsiya zritel’noy sistemy u bol’nykh detskim tserebral’nym paralichom. Materialy X Vseross. s”yezda nevrologov s mezhdunarod. uchastiyem. N. Novgorod: 2012. s. 562-3. [in Russian].
31. Koshel’kov DA, Machinskaya RI. Funktsional’noye vzaimodeystviye korkovykh zon v protsesse vyrabotki strategii kognitivnoy deyatel’nosti. Analiz kogerentnosti teta-ritma EEG. Fiziologiya cheloveka. 2010;6:55-60. [in Russian].
32. Baranov AA, Sheplyagina LA, redaktory. Farber DA. Strukturno-funktsional’noye sozrevaniye mozga rebenka. Tekst. Fiziologiya rosta i razvitiya rebenka. T. 1. M.: GEOTAR-Media; 2006. s. 7. [in Russian].
33. Korolova NV, Kolesnikov SI, Vorob’yev SV. Fenomenologicheskiy atlas po klinicheskoy elektroentsefalografii. Irkutsk: GU NTS ME VSNTS SO RAMN; 2013. s. 102. [in Russian].
34. Belousova TV, Ryazhina LA. Perinatal’nyye porazheniya tsentral’noy nervnoy sistemy u novorozhdennykh: metodicheskiye rekomendatsii. SPb.: OOO «Natis Print»; 2010. 96 s. [in Russian].
35. Kropotova YuD. Kolichestvennaya EEG, kognitivnyye vyzvannyye potentsialy mozga cheloveka i neyroterapiya. Glava 17. 2010. s. 165-73. [in Russian].
36. Baranov AA, Sheplyagina LA, redaktory. Maslova OI. Vozrastnaya dinamika kognitivnoy deyatel’nosti u giperaktivnykh detey. Tekst. Fiziologiya rosta i razvitiya rebenka. T. 1. M.: GEO-TAR-Media; 2006. s. 80-96. [in Russian].

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 4 Part 2 (147), 2018 year, 66-71 pages, index UDK 616.831.3:546.21:616-008.64:612.6-053.4

10.29254/2077-4214-2018-4-2-147-66-71