Superficial siderosis of the central nervous system: case report

Introdução: A Siderose Superficial do Sistema Nervoso Central (SS) é uma doença rara caracterizada pelo depósito de hemossiderina no encéfalo e na medula espinhal. Clinicamente se caracteriza por ataxia e surdez neurossensorial progressivas associados a lesão do neurônio motor superior. O diagnóstico é feito através do exame de ressonância nuclear magnética (RNM) de Encéfalo e Medula Espinhal. Objetivo: Relatar um caso de paciente com elementos característicos da síndrome, associados à presença incomum de epilepsia. Método: Relatamos o caso de um paciente com SS acompanhado no Instituto de Neurologia Deolindo Couto da UFRJ-RJ. Conclusão: A Siderose Superficial do Sistema Nervoso Central é uma afecção do SNC que deve ser pensada em todo paciente com quadro de ataxia e surdez neurossensorial progressivas, necessitando de RNM, preferencialmente as imagens de Gradiente eco em T2 para o diagnóstico.Introduction: Superficial Siderosis Central Nervous System (SS) is a rare disease characterized by the deposition of hemosiderin in the brain and spinal cord. Clinically there is progressive ataxia and sensorineural deafness associated with upper motor neuron lesion. The diagnosis is made by examination of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Brain and Spinal Cord. Objective: Report a case of a patient with characteristic features of the syndrome, associated with the unusual presence of epilepsy. Method: We report the case of a patient with SS followed at the Institute of Neurology Deolindo Couto da UFRJ-RJ. Conclusion: The Superficial Siderosis Central Nervous System is a disease of the CNS that must be considered in any patient with ataxia and progressive deafness, requiring MRI, preferably images Gradient echo T2 for diagnosis

Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

Comparison between the NASCET method and subjective visual impression in the evaluation of internal carotid artery stenosis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of subjective visual impression (SVI) of an experienced neuro-radiologist in the measurement of the degree of internal carotid artery (IC) stenosis evaluated by digital angiography (DGA). METHOD: Ten symptomatic patients with internal carotid stenosis greater than 70% in a previous duplex scan were submitted to DGA. The degree of stenosis in both sides (symptomatic and asymptomatic) were evaluated by the same neuro-radiologist who gave his SVI and applied the NASCET method immediately after. Both methods were compared using the intraclass correlation coeficient (r) and its 95% confidence interval (95% ci). For each method, the sample (20 ICs) was also divided in surgical (stenosis between 70 and 99%) and non surgical ICs, using kappa concordance coeficient (k) to compare the results. RESULTS: The results comparing the 20 values obtained by each method are: r = 0.90 (95% ci: 0.77 -- 0.96). Dividing the sample in surgical and non surgical ICs, k = 0.857, p < 0.0001; sensitivity = 100% (39.6% - 100%); specificity = 93.8% (67.7% - 99.7%); positive predictive value = 80% (29.9% - 98.9%); negative predictive value = 100% (74,7% - 100%). CONCLUSION: The SVI may be used by at least some experienced neuroradiologists as a preliminary tool to evaluate the degree of IC stenosis with DGA, but a standardised and well established method should be routinely performed