It is well established that the medial-temporal lobe (MTL) is critical for recognition memory. The MTL is known to be composed of distinct structures that are organized in a hierarchical manner. At present, it remains controversial whether lower structures in this hierarchy, such as perirhinal cortex, support memory functions that are distinct from those of higher structures, in particular the hippocampus. Perirhinal cortex has been proposed to play a specific role in the assessment of familiarity during recognition, which can be distinguished from the selective contributions of the hippocampus to the recollection of episodic detail. Some researchers have argued, however, that the distinction between familiarity and recollection cannot capture functional specialization within the MTL and have proposed single-process accounts. Evidence supporting the dual-process view comes from demonstrations that selective hippocampal damage can produce isolated recollection impairments. It is unclear, however, whether temporal-lobe lesions that spare the hippocampus can produce selective familiarity impairments. Without this demonstration, single-process accounts cannot be ruled out. We examined recognition memory in NB, an individual who underwent surgical resection of left anterior temporal-lobe structures for treatment of intractable epilepsy. Her resection included a large portion of perirhinal cortex but spared the hippocampus. The results of four experiments based on three different experimental procedures (remember-know paradigm, receiver operating characteristics, and response-deadline procedure) indicate that NB exhibits impaired familiarity with preserved recollection. The present findings thus provide a crucial missing piece of support for functional specialization in the MTL.epilepsy ͉ medial-temporal lobe ͉ perirhinal cortex ͉ recognition memory
The likelihood of rupture of unruptured intracranial aneurysms that were less than 10 mm in diameter was exceedingly low among patients in group 1 and was substantially higher among those in group 2. The risk of morbidity and mortality related to surgery greatly exceeded the 7.5-year risk of rupture among patients in group 1 with unruptured intracranial aneurysms smaller than 10 mm in diameter.
The authors demonstrate important beneficial trends, some long-term benefits, and absence of adverse effects of hippocampal electrical stimulation in mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. However, the effect sizes observed were smaller than those reported in non-randomized, unblinded studies.
A series of 300 consecutive stereotactic biopsies for intra-axial brain lesions performed by one neurosurgeon was critically analyzed regarding complications of the procedure. Complications were incurred by a total of 19 patients (6.3%). Five patients (1.7%) died following the procedure, all due to intracranial hypertension: one from subarachnoid hemorrhage, one from intracerebral hemorrhage, and three from increased edema without hemorrhage. The three patients who died without hemorrhage all had marked intracranial hypertension at the time of biopsy. All five patients who died harbored a glioblastoma multiforme. The surviving 14 patients (4.7%) with complications suffered increased neurological deficit due to hemorrhage. In 10 (3.3%), the deficit was mild and/or transient; in the other four (1.3%), a major deficit was incurred which markedly affected the remainder of the patient's life. Therefore, mortality or major morbidity was seen in 3.0% of patients and minor morbidity in 3.3%. Stereotactic biopsy is a very effective procedure with a complication rate significantly lower than that of craniotomy (particularly in the population of patients selected for stereotactic biopsy), but in a small number of patients the outcome is devastating.
SUMMARYThe effect of continuous electrical stimulation of the hippocampus bilaterally on seizures and memory was assessed in two subjects with seizures from both mesial temporal lobes who were not candidates for resective epilepsy surgery. A double blind, randomized, controlled, cross-over trial design was utilized. Two electrodes with four contacts each were implanted along the axis of the hippocampus bilaterally. Simultaneous stimulation of all electrodes contacts was either on or off during each 3-month interval. Seizure frequency decreased by 33% in the two patients during stimulation and remained lower by 25% for the 3 months after stimulation was turned off before returning to baseline (p < 0.01). No consistent change in objective or subjective measures of memory occurred. No other adverse effects occurred. Seizure frequency is reduced both during and for a period after bilateral hippocampal stimulation, but the overall impact in this study is not as robust as has been previously reported. KEY WORDS: Seizure, Hippocampus, DBS, Memory, Epilepsy.A possible therapeutic role of direct electrical stimulation of the hippocampus (HS) has been suggested in recent reports as an alternative to temporal lobectomy for management of seizures in intractable temporal lobe epilepsy, particularly when seizures are multifocal in origin or there is a risk of postoperative memory impairment (Velasco et al., 2000;Vonck et al., 2002;Tellez-Zenteno et al., 2006). We performed a double blind, randomized, crossover, controlled trial of chronic bilateral simultaneous HS in two patients. Methods Patients and study designTwo adults, ages 45 and 54 years, with medically intractable focal epilepsy who were poor candidates for resective surgery on the basis of independent bitemporal originating seizures were assessed. Both had normal intelligence and provided informed consent as required by our university ethics review board. A double blind, randomized, controlled, cross-over design was used. Following a 3-month baseline period after implantation with no stimulation, the stimulator was either on or off for a randomly determined 3-month interval. Each ''on'' interval was followed by 3 months of no stimulation (washout) to look for any holdover effect. Both the treating neurologist and patient were blind to the stimulator status. StimulationEquipment from our deep brain stimulation program for movement disorders was used and the implantation technique modified to target the hippocampus. Under general anesthesia, a stereotaxic head frame was used to insert a Pisces quadripolar electrode 3 mm in length with an interelectrode distance of 6 mm (Medtronic 3487A, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.) along the axis of the hippocampus on each side so that the anterior contact rested in the anterior pes hippocampus (Tellez-Zenteno et al., 2006). This
Study design: Clinical practice guidelines. Objectives: To develop the first Canadian clinical practice guidelines for treatment of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). Setting: The guidelines are relevant for inpatient and outpatient SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada. Methods: The CanPainSCI Working Group reviewed the evidence for different treatment options and achieved consensus. The Working Group then developed clinical considerations for each recommendation. Recommendations for research are also included. Results: Twelve recommendations were developed for the management of neuropathic pain after SCI. The recommendations address both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment modalities. Conclusions: An expert Working Group developed recommendations for the treatment of neuropathic pain after SCI that should be used to inform practice.
By using objective measures to detect dynamic gait characteristics, the therapeutic potential of spinal cord stimulation was optimized to each participant's characteristics. This pilot study demonstrated the safety and significant therapeutic outcome of spinal cord stimulation in advanced PD patients, and thus a larger and longer clinical study will be conducted to replicate these results. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.