Epilepsy and Bilingualism. A Systematic Review
Epilepsy and Bilingualism. A Systematic Review
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fneur.2019.01235
复制
发表时间：
2019-11-26
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Bonelli, Silvia
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bartha-Doering, Lisa;Bonelli, Silvia
背景：在癫痫患者中，主要针对患者的母语进行了语言能力和神经语言组织的研究。然而，在临床实践中，许多患者使用不止一种语言或使用第二语言多于母语。然而，有关双语癫痫患者两种语言的语言特征和大脑组织的信息却很少。因此，本研究的目的是系统回顾有关双语癫痫患者的语言定位和语言能力的文献。方法：使用各种电子数据库（包括 Embase 和 Medline）进行广泛的文献检索。纳入标准的关键方面是双语癫痫患者的语言能力评估和/或神经语言图谱研究。结果：我们的搜索策略生成了 155 篇有关双语癫痫患者语言的文章。其中，12 人符合最终资格标准。大多数纳入的文章都集中于使用功能磁共振成像、和田试验或皮层电刺激对双语癫痫患者进行语言脑图绘制，其中五项研究调查了该患者组的发作间期语言能力。研究结果显示，双语患者的语言能力存在明显的异质性，从完整的语言特征到两种语言的多种语言功能受损。然而，母语往往比第二语言保存得更好。此外，对两种语言的大脑图谱的研究再次揭示了不同的发现，从两种语言的相同大脑区域到非母语的重叠但分布更广的皮层区域。结论：本综述强调了评估两种语言的语言能力的必要性，以及术前对双语癫痫患者的两种语言进行映射的必要性。与对单语癫痫患者的语言能力和语言定位的巨大科学兴趣相反，这篇综述表明，在双语患者中，语言功能的检查和与两种语言相关的大脑区域的识别迄今为止在癫痫研究中发挥了次要作用。因此，我们的评论强调了该领域未来研究活动的必要性。
Background: In patients with epilepsy, language abilities and neural language organization have been primarily investigated for the patient's mother tongue. However, in clinical practice, many patients use more than one language or use their second language more than their mother tongue. Yet, information about the linguistic profiles and brain organization of both languages in bilingual epilepsy patients is scarce. The purpose of this study was thus to systematically review the literature on language localization and language abilities in bilingual patients with epilepsy. Methods: An extensive literature search was performed using various electronic databases, including Embase and Medline. Key aspects of inclusion criteria were the assessment of language abilities and/or the investigation of neural language mapping in bilingual patients with epilepsy. Results: Our search strategy yielded 155 articles on language in bilingual epilepsy patients. Of these, 12 met final eligibility criteria. The majority of included articles focused on brain mapping of language using fMRI, Wada-test, or electrocortical stimulation in bilingual epilepsy patients, five studies investigated interictal language abilities in this patient group. Study results showed a pronounced heterogeneity of language abilities in bilingual patients, varying from intact language profiles to impairment in several language functions in both languages. However, the mother tongue was most often better perserved than the second language. Furthermore, studies on brain mapping of both languages again revealed heterogeneous findings ranging from identical brain regions for both languages to overlapping, but more distributed cortical areas for the non-native language. Conclusions: This review underlines the need to evaluate linguistic abilities in both languages, as well as the necessity to preoperatively map both languages in bilingual epilepsy patients. In contrast to the large scientific interest in language abilities and language localization in monolingual epilepsy patients, this review shows that in bilingual patients, the examination of language functions and the identification of brain regions associated with both languages so far played a minor role in epilepsy research. Our review thus emphasizes the need of future research activities in this field.