中文摘要：

目的应用三重刺激技术（TST）评估电针对急性脑梗死（ACI）患者皮质脊髓束损伤与运动功能障碍恢复的影响。方法选择2011年6月至2015年3月广东佛山市中医院神经内科收治的ACI患者，按随机数宁表法将符合纳入标准的6l例ACI患者分为对照组（基础治疗）30例，电针组（基础治疗＋电针）3l例；另选健康人（不予任何干预）20例测定参考值作为对照。治疗前、治疗14d后分别采用美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表（NIHSS）、改良Barthel指数（MBI）、Fugl-Meym-运动功能评分（FMA）、TST评定患者神经功能、运动功能、日常生活活动能力（ADI。）及皮质脊髓束传导功能。结果治疗前电针组和对照组NIHSS、MBI、FMA评分及TST测试水平比较差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0．05）。治疗14d后电针组和对照组TST测试水平均明硅高于治疗前和健康组；而且电针组TST测试水平[（39．91±31．76）％比（56．45±31．49）％]、总有效率（93．50％比73．33％）、NIHSS（分：2．52±1．93比4．17±3．39）、MBI（分：88．55±11．70比7933±16．70）、FMA评分（分：85．27±16．59比74．17±24．16）均明显优于对照组（均P〈0．05）；电针组TST测试水平与ACI运动功能恢复程度成负卡H关（r=-0．725，P〈O．05）。结论TST是客观评估电针治疗ACI后皮质脊髓束损伤与运动障碍恢复的检测方法，电针促进ACI运动神经功能恢复与减轻皮质脊髓束损伤等密切有关。

英文摘要：

Objective： To assess the effects of electroacupuncture （EA） on corticospinal tract injury and motor function recovery in patients with acute cerebral infarction （ACI） by triple stimulation technique （TST）. Methods Totally 61 patients with ACI and consistent with the criteria of entering into this study group admitted to the Department of Neurology in Foshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Guangdong Province from June 2011 to March 2015 were enrolled, they were randomly divided into control group （basic treatment） and EA group （basic treatment ＋ EA） with 31 cases in each group, another 20 healthy participators （not given any treatment） were included into this trail for reference to contrast. Before treatment and 14-day after treatment, the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale （NIHSS）, modified Barthel index （MBI）, Fugl-Meyer motor function scale （FMA）, and the TST test were applied to evaluate the patients＇ neural function, motor function, ordinary daily life （ADL） activity, and the transfer function of cortieospinal tract in two groups. Results Before treatment, there were no statistical significant differences between EA group and control group in NIHSS, MBI, FMA and TST test （all P 〉 0.05）. After 14-day treatment, the levels of TST test in EA group and control group were obviously higher than those before treatment and the level of healthy group, Compared with control group, the level ofTST test, total effective rate, NIHSS score, MBI score, and FMA score in EA group were significantly better [the levd of TST test： （39.91±31.76）% vs, （56.45 ±31.49）%, total effective rate： 93.50% vs. 73.33%, NIHSS scores： 2.52±1.93 vs. 4.17±3.39, MBI scores： 88.55±11.70 vs. 79.33±16.70, FMA scores： 85.27±16,59 vs. 74.17± 24.16, all P 〈 0.05]. Moreover, the level of TST test in EA group was negatively correlated with the grade of ACI motor function recovery （r = -0.725, P 〈 0.05）. Conclusions TST is an effective method to object