The Birth and Evolution of Neuroscience Through Cadaveric Dissection

Moon, Karam; Filis, Andreas; Cohen, Alan R.

doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000383135.92953.a3

Cited by 33 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 48 publications

(54 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For the neurosciences, centuries of postmortem examination have provided a fundamental understanding of human brain structure and organization, as well as the effect of a range of disease processes (1). With the advent of powerful in vivo imaging methods (2), the study of cadavers has become less important in modern-day neuroscience research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Limitations of ex vivo measurements for in vivo neuroscience

Opitz

Falchier

Linn

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A long history of postmortem studies has provided significant insight into human brain structure and organization. Cadavers have also proven instrumental for the measurement of artifacts and nonneural effects in functional imaging, and more recently, the study of biophysical properties critical to brain stimulation. However, death produces significant changes in the biophysical properties of brain tissues, making an ex vivo to in vivo comparison complex, and even questionable. This study directly compares biophysical properties of electric fields arising from transcranial electric stimulation (TES) in a nonhuman primate brain pre-and postmortem. We show that pre-vs. postmortem, TES-induced intracranial electric fields differ significantly in both strength and frequency response dynamics, even while controlling for confounding factors such as body temperature. Our results clearly indicate that ex vivo cadaver and in vivo measurements are not easily equitable. In vivo examinations remain essential to establishing an adequate understanding of even basic biophysical phenomena in vivo.biophysical | electric field | nonhuman primate T he use of cadavers to study human anatomy has a long history in medicine and science. For the neurosciences, centuries of postmortem examination have provided a fundamental understanding of human brain structure and organization, as well as the effect of a range of disease processes (1). With the advent of powerful in vivo imaging methods (2), the study of cadavers has become less important in modern-day neuroscience research. However, cadavers are still regularly used to examine possible methodological artifacts in brain imaging studies because of the complete absence of neuronal activity with largely preserved anatomical structures (3, 4). Numerous studies have relied on cadavers to establish the conductivity of differing tissue types, with notable discrepancies compared with in vivo measurements (5-8). Similarly, in developing noninvasive transcranial electric stimulation (TES) procedures, some have suggested the use of cadavers for measuring electric fields generated in the brain during stimulation. Such knowledge is crucial to efforts aiming to optimize brain stimulation, whether focusing on the spatial accuracy of stimulation, the magnitude of a dose actually delivered to an individual, or the possible variations in delivery across individuals. The most recent of these gained widespread attention because of its conclusion that TES-induced currents have poor penetration through the scalp and skull (9). These findings seem to reinforce concerns about the effectiveness of current dosing levels (10); however, to understand their implications, it is first important to determine how well cadaver-based conductivity measurements approximate in vivo conditions.Death initiates a cascade of biochemical processes affecting the biophysical properties of body and brain tissues, which can make the generalization from ex vivo results to the in vivo case problematic. However, it is not clear how in...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Limitations of ex vivo measurements for in vivo neuroscience

Opitz

Falchier

Linn

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…41 Herophilus and Erasistratus established the importance of the brain and the sensory and motor functions of the nerves. 31 According to Galen, Herophilus was the first to describe the connection between the cerebrum and cerebellum through the ventricular system and the structural distinction between the cerebrum and cerebellum. Herophilus extensively studied the lateral, third, and fourth ventricles because he thought they were part of the seat of the soul.…”

Section: Herophilus Of Chalcedon: 335-280 Bcmentioning

confidence: 99%

The journey of discovering skull base anatomy in ancient Egypt and the special influence of Alexandria

Elhadi

Kalb²,

Pérez-Orribo³

et al. 2012

FOC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of anatomy, one of the most ancient sciences, first evolved in Egypt. From the Early Dynastic Period (3100 bc) until the time of Galen at the end of the 2nd century ad, Egypt was the center of anatomical knowledge, including neuroanatomy. Knowledge of neuroanatomy first became important so that sacred rituals could be performed by ancient Egyptian embalmers during mummification procedures. Later, neuroanatomy became a science to be studied by wise men at the ancient temple of Memphis. As religious conflicts developed, the study of the human body became restricted. Myths started to replace scientific research, squelching further exploration of the human body until Alexander the Great founded the city of Alexandria. This period witnessed a revolution in the study of anatomy and functional anatomy. Herophilus of Chalcedon, Erasistratus of Chios, Rufus of Ephesus, and Galen of Pergamon were prominent physicians who studied at the medical school of Alexandria and contributed greatly to knowledge about the anatomy of the skull base. After the Royal Library of Alexandria was burned and laws were passed prohibiting human dissections based on religious and cultural factors, knowledge of human skull base anatomy plateaued for almost 1500 years. In this article the authors consider the beginning of this journey, from the earliest descriptions of skull base anatomy to the establishment of basic skull base anatomy in ancient Egypt.

show abstract

“…4,11,20 During this period, many anatomical discoveries were described and were meticulously documented in anatomical drawings. 2,4,11,22 Although most anatomists of the era were interested in global human anatomy and pathophysiology, a few held distinct interests in the neurological system. Humphrey Ridley authored the first treatise focused on neuroanatomy published in English language in 1695, titled (Fig.…”

Section: Predilection For the Brainmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They invented syringes and connective silver tubings and used a variety of colored injection materials, such as India ink and liquor, leading to the discovery of the circle of Willis. 8,11,14 A few years later, Humphrey Ridley started using warm injections. He used mercury and tinged wax to highlight the cerebrovascular anatomy along with liquor.…”

Section: Selective Cerebrovascular Cadaveric Injectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this, Ridley remains a relatively unknown figure of the postmedieval era of neuroanatomical discovery. 4,9,11,16 We reviewed the published works on neuroanatomy authored by Ridley to understand his novel contributions to skull base anatomy and to understand the innovative cadaveric dissections and research methods that he used. This historical vignette attempts to describe Ridley's academic work and his influence on neuroscience and neurosurgical understanding.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Humphrey Ridley (1653–1708): 17th century evolution in neuroanatomy and selective cerebrovascular injections for cadaver dissection

Thakur

Sonig²,

Chittiboina³

et al. 2012

FOC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humphrey Ridley, M.D. (1653–1708), is a relatively unknown historical figure, belonging to the postmedieval era of neuroanatomical discovery. He was born in the market town of Mansfield, 14 miles from the county of Nottinghamshire, England. After studying at Merton College, Oxford, he pursued medicine at Leiden University in the Netherlands. In 1688, he was incorporated as an M.D. at Cambridge. Ridley authored the first original treatise in English language on neuroanatomy, The Anatomy of the Brain Containing its Mechanisms and Physiology: Together with Some New Discoveries and Corrections of Ancient and Modern Authors upon that Subject. Ridley described the venous anatomy of the eponymous circular sinus in connection with the parasellar compartment. His methods were novel, unique, and effective. To appreciate the venous anatomy, he preferred to perform his anatomical dissections on recently executed criminals who had been hanged. These cadavers had considerable venous engorgement, which made the skull base venous anatomy clearer. To enhance the appearance of the cerebral vasculature further, he used tinged wax and quicksilver in the injections. He set up experimental models to answer questions definitively, in proving that the arachnoid mater is a separate meningeal layer. The first description of the subarachnoid cisterns, blood-brain barrier, and the fifth cranial nerve ganglion with its branches are also attributed to Ridley. This historical vignette revisits Ridley's life and academic work that influenced neuroscience and neurosurgical understanding in its infancy. It is unfortunate that most of his novel contributions have gone unnoticed and uncited. The authors hope that this article will inform the neurosurgical community of Ridley's contributions to the field of neurosurgery.

show abstract

The Birth and Evolution of Neuroscience Through Cadaveric Dissection

Cited by 33 publications

References 48 publications

Limitations of ex vivo measurements for in vivo neuroscience

Limitations of ex vivo measurements for in vivo neuroscience

The journey of discovering skull base anatomy in ancient Egypt and the special influence of Alexandria

Humphrey Ridley (1653–1708): 17th century evolution in neuroanatomy and selective cerebrovascular injections for cadaver dissection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About