Neurological disorders associated with glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) antibodies include stiff-person syndrome (SPS) and its variants -stiff trunk syndrome, stiff limbs syndrome, progressive encephalomyelitis with rigidity, SPS-plus and paraneoplastic SPS -as well as epilepsy and ataxia [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] . These syndromes are often found in association with other autoimmune disorders, such as diabetes mellitus, in more than one thirds of all cases, and, less commonly, those caused by antithyroid, antinuclear and antiparietal cell antibodies (5-10%) [1][2][3][9][10][11][12][13] . GAD is a cytoplasmic enzyme that accelerates the conversion of glutamic acid to gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), an inhibitory neurotransmitter present in the brain and spinal cord. GAD is synthesized mainly in presynaptic GABAergic neurons in the central nervous system and in the b cells in the islets of Langerhans in the pancreas. GAD autoantibodies are found in around 60 to 80% of SPS cases. Although there are two GAD isoforms ¾ GAD65 and GAD67 ¾ the main target for GAD autoantibodies in SPS is GAD65 [9][10][11][12][13][14] . The pathogenetic role of autoantibodies in SPS is unclear. However, all SPS autoantigens identified to date are synaptic proteins involved in inhibitory synaptic transmission, such as GAD and amphiphysin (presynaptic antigens) and GABA(A) receptor-associated protein (GABARAP) and gephyrin (postsynaptic antigens). The autoantibodies anti-amphiphysin and anti-gephyrin have been linked to paraneoplastic SPS [9][10][11][12][13][14][15] . The objective of this study was to present the clinical and laboratory findings of 12 patients with neurological disorders associated with anti-GAD antibodies. ABSTRACT Neurological disorders associated with glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) antibodies are rare pleomorphic diseases of uncertain cause, of which stiff-person syndrome (SPS) is the best-known. Here, we described nine consecutive cases of neurological disorders associated with anti-GAD, including nine patients with SPS and three cases with cerebellar ataxia. Additionally, four had hypothyroidism, three epilepsy, two diabetes mellitus and two axial myoclonus.
Objective: To describe the most important coma scales developed in the last fifty years. Method: A review of the literature between 1969 and 2009 in the Medline and Scielo databases was carried out using the following keywords: coma scales, coma, disorders of consciousness, coma score and levels of coma. Results: Five main scales were found in chronological order: the Jouvet coma scale, the Moscow coma scale, the Glasgow coma scale (GCS), the Bozza-Marrubini scale and the FOUR score (Full Outline of UnResponsiveness), as well as other scales that have had less impact and are rarely used outside their country of origin. Discussion: Of the five main scales, the GCS is by far the most widely used. It is easy to apply and very suitable for cases of traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, it has shortcomings, such as the fact that the speech component in intubated patients cannot be tested. While the Jouvet scale is quite sensitive, particularly for levels of consciousness closer to normal levels, it is difficult to use. The Moscow scale has good predictive value but is little used by the medical community. The FOUR score is easy to apply and provides more neurological details than the Glasgow scale.
O artigo tem por objetivo discutir os avanços e as limitações da abordagem multiparadigmática no desenvolvimento de estudos organizacionais. O modelo dos quatro paradigmas (funcionalista, interpretativo, humanista radical e estruturalista radical) propostos por Burrell e Morgan (1979) catalisou a proliferação de perspectivas concorrentes, além de gerar a polarização e a segregação. Cada paradigma é tratado numa perspectiva única, sendo, portanto, incomensurável com outro paradigma, contrariando os estudiosos que defendem a comunicação entre paradigmas. A visão pluralista é relevante, porque incentiva os estudiosos a ver as organizações sob diferentes prismas, para sucumbir à visão reducionista da teoria das organizações, além de favorecer o desenvolvimento de novas perspectivas para a análise organizacional. Todavia, a utilização de paradigmas múltiplos também apresenta limites, já que o pesquisador, ao lidar com diferentes abordagens, pode ficar sem referência ou fundamentação, além de ter, às vezes, dificuldade para se distanciar do paradigma dominante. Todas essas articulações e junções paradigmáticas podem ser feitas, desde que o pesquisador tenha sempre uma referência e uma fundamentação, visando manter a coerência e a consistência do que está sendo pesquisado.
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.