Seizure prediction : ready for a new era

Acknowledgements: The authors acknowledge colleagues in the international seizure prediction group for valuable discussions. L.K. acknowledges funding support from the National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1130468) and the James S. McDonnell Foundation (220020419) and acknowledges the contribution of Dean R. Freestone at the University of Melbourne, Australia, to the creation of Fig. 3.Peer reviewedPostprin

Spinal infection: state of the art and management algorithm

Spinal infection is a rare pathology although a concerning rising incidence has been observed in recent years. This increase might reflect a progressively more susceptible population but also the availability of increased diagnostic accuracy. Yet, even with improved diagnosis tools and procedures, the delay in diagnosis remains an important issue. This review aims to highlight the importance of a methodological attitude towards accurate and prompt diagnosis using an algorithm to aid on spinal infection management. METHODS: Appropriate literature on spinal infection was selected using databases from the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. RESULTS: Literature reveals that histopathological analysis of infected tissues is a paramount for diagnosis and must be performed routinely. Antibiotic therapy is transversal to both conservative and surgical approaches and must be initiated after etiological diagnosis. Indications for surgical treatment include neurological deficits or sepsis, spine instability and/or deformity, presence of epidural abscess and upon failure of conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A methodological assessment could lead to diagnosis effectiveness of spinal infection. Towards this, we present a management algorithm based on literature findings

1p36 deletion syndrome: an update

Valerie K Jordan,1 Hitisha P Zaveri,2 Daryl A Scott1,2 1Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; 2Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA Abstract: Deletions of chromosome 1p36 affect approximately 1 in 5,000 newborns and are the most common terminal deletions in humans. Medical problems commonly caused by terminal deletions of 1p36 include developmental delay, intellectual disability, seizures, vision problems, hearing loss, short stature, distinctive facial features, brain anomalies, orofacial clefting, congenital heart defects, cardiomyopathy, and renal anomalies. Although 1p36 deletion syndrome is considered clinically recognizable, there is significant phenotypic variation among affected individuals. This variation is due, at least in part, to the genetic heterogeneity seen in 1p36 deletions which include terminal and interstitial deletions of varying lengths located throughout the 30 Mb of DNA that comprise chromosome 1p36. Array-based copy number variant analysis can easily identify genomic regions of 1p36 that are deleted in an affected individual. However, predicting the phenotype of an individual based solely on the location and extent of their 1p36 deletion remains a challenge since most of the genes that contribute to 1p36-related phenotypes have yet to be identified. In addition, haploinsufficiency of more than one gene may contribute to some phenotypes. In this article, we review recent successes in the effort to map and identify the genes and genomic regions that contribute to specific 1p36-related phenotypes. In particular, we highlight evidence implicating MMP23B, GABRD, SKI, PRDM16, KCNAB2, RERE, UBE4B, CASZ1, PDPN, SPEN, ECE1, HSPG2, and LUZP1 in various 1p36 deletion phenotypes. Keywords: chromosome 1p36, chromosome deletion, 1p36 deletion syndrome, monosomy 1p3

Controversies in epilepsy: Debates held during the Fourth International Workshop on Seizure Prediction

Debates on 6 controversial topics were held during the Fourth International Workshop on Seizure Prediction (IWSP4) convened in Kansas City (July 4–7, 2009). The topics were 1) Ictogenesis: focus vs. network? 2) Spikes and seizures: step-relatives or siblings? 3) Ictogenesis: a result of hyposynchrony? 4) Can focal seizures be caused by excessive inhibition? 5) Do high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) provide relevant independent information? and 6) Phase synchronization – is it worthwhile as measured? This manuscript, written by the IWSP4 organizing committee and the debaters, summarizes the arguments presented during the debates

Controversies in epilepsy: debates held during the Fourth International Workshop on Seizure Prediction.

Debates on six controversial topics were held during the Fourth International Workshop on Seizure Prediction (IWSP4) convened in Kansas City, KS, USA, July 4-7, 2009. The topics were (1) Ictogenesis: Focus versus Network? (2) Spikes and Seizures: Step-relatives or Siblings? (3) Ictogenesis: A Result of Hyposynchrony? (4) Can Focal Seizures Be Caused by Excessive Inhibition? (5) Do High-Frequency Oscillations Provide Relevant Independent Information? (6) Phase Synchronization: Is It Worthwhile as Measured? This article, written by the IWSP4 organizing committee and the debaters, summarizes the arguments presented during the debates