[German neurology and neurologists during the Third Reich: brain research and "euthanasia"]. / Neurologie und Neurologen in der NS-Zeit: Hirnforschung und "Euthanasie".

The connection between systematic killing of the mentally ill and disabled, euphemistically called "euthanasia" in the National Socialism ideology, and German brain research has been thoroughly investigated and in detail; however, the impact of this criminal nexus on the image and self-perception of German neurologists as well as the status of neurology as a medical discipline is still the subject of controversial debates.Between 1939 and 1945 the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute (KWI) in Berlin along with other research centres were insofar enmeshed in the "euthanasia" program as brains of killed patients were dissected in the guise of "concomitant research" in order to generate medical knowledge. Affected were mainly individuals suffering from oligophrenia, early childhood brain atrophy, cerebral palsy and epilepsy. According to current historical research, collegial networks were instrumental in receiving brains of killed patients. Furthermore, civil research units were supplemented by military ones at the KWI. These, too, were concerned with the collection of medical knowledge, for instance on injuries of the brain and spinal cord. The historical approach to consider the Nazi organizations and medicine as "resources for each other" seems, therefore, at least in part applicable to neurology.

A century of British military neurosurgery.

At the time of the Boer War in 1899 penetrating head injuries, which formed a large proportion of the battlefield casualties, resulted in almost 100% mortality. Since that time up to the present day, significant improvements in technique, equipment and organisation have reduced the mortality to about 10%.

Battle for the mind: World War 1 and the birth of military psychiatry.

The 100th anniversary of the outbreak of World War 1 could be viewed as a tempting opportunity to acknowledge the origins of military psychiatry and the start of a journey from psychological ignorance to enlightenment. However, the psychiatric legacy of the war is ambiguous. During World War 1, a new disorder (shellshock) and a new treatment (forward psychiatry) were introduced, but the former should not be thought of as the first recognition of what is now called post-traumatic stress disorder and the latter did not offer the solution to the management of psychiatric casualties, as was subsequently claimed. For this Series paper, we researched contemporary publications, classified military reports, and casualty returns to reassess the conventional narrative about the effect of shellshock on psychiatric practice. We conclude that the expression of distress by soldiers was culturally mediated and that patients with postcombat syndromes presented with symptom clusters and causal interpretations that engaged the attention of doctors but also resonated with popular health concerns. Likewise, claims for the efficacy of forward psychiatry were inflated. The vigorous debates that arose in response to controversy about the nature of psychiatric disorders and the discussions about how these disorders should be managed remain relevant to the trauma experienced by military personnel who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. The psychiatric history of World War 1 should be thought of as an opportunity for commemoration and in terms of its contemporary relevance-not as an opportunity for self-congratulation.

The menace reflex.

The menace reflex (blink reflex to visual threat) tests visual processing at the bedside in patients who cannot participate in normal visual field testing. We reviewed a collection of recently discovered historical movies showing the experiments of the Dutch physiologist Gysbertus Rademaker (1887-1957), exploring the anatomy of this reflex by making cerebral lesions in dogs. The experiments show not only that the menace reflex is cortically mediated, but also that lesions outside the visual cortex can abolish the reflex. Therefore, although often erroneously used in this way, an absent menace does not always indicate a visual field deficit.

["A shot at the father: a student's assault". Sigmund Freud and the case of Ernst Haberl]. / "Ein Schuss gegen den Vater. Attentat eines Studenten" Sigmund Freud und der "Fall Ernst Haberl".

In the fall of 1922, the Freud family was involved in a criminal case: The son of Mathilde Freud's nursing sister, Ernst Haberl, had shot at his father. With the help of August Aichhorn the Viennese Juvenile Court's social assistance department was engaged on behalf of the young man. Freud commissioned the lawyer Valentin Teirich to defend him in court. The Viennese dailies reported the deed and the trial extensively (Haberl was acquitted). That a comment published in the Neue Freie Presse was written by Freud himself, as Teirich believed, is, according to Anna Freud, highly improbable.

Hyponatremia and brain injury: historical and contemporary perspectives.

Hyponatremia is common in neurocritical care patients and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite decades of research into the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone (SIADH) and cerebral salt wasting (CSW), their underlying pathophysiological mechanisms are still not fully understood. This paper reviews the history behind our understanding of hyponatremia in patients with neurologic injury, including the first reports of CSW and SIADH, and current and future challenges to diagnosis and management in this setting. Such challenges include distinguishing CSW, SIADH, and hypovolemic hyponatremia due to a normal pressure natriuresis from the administration of large volumes of fluids, and hyponatremia due to certain medications used in the neurocritical care population. Potential treatments for hyponatremia include mineralocorticoids and vasopressin 2 receptor antagonists, but further work is required to validate their usage. Ultimately, a greater understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlining hyponatremia in neurocritical care patients remains our biggest obstacle to optimizing patient outcomes in this challenging population.

[Phineas Gage and the enigma of the prefrontal cortex]. / Phineas Gage y el enigma del córtex prefrontal.

Perhaps the most famous brain injury in history was a penetrating wound suffered by a rail road worker named Phineas Gage on September 13, 1848. Twelve years after his injury, on the 21st of May, 1860 Phineas Gage died of an epileptic seizure. In 1868 Dr. Harlow gave an outline of Gage's case history and first disclosed his remarkable personality change. One might think this report would assure Gage a permanent place in the annals of neurology, but this was not the case. There was a good reason for this neglect: hardly anyone knew about Harlow's 1868 report. Dr. David Ferrier, an early proponent of the localisation of cerebral function, rescued Gage from obscurity and used the case as the highlight of his famous 1878 Goulstonian lectures. Gage had, through a tragic natural experiment, provided proof of what Ferrier's studies showed: the pre-frontal cortex was not a "non-functional" brain area. A rod going through the prefrontal cortex of Phineas Gage signalled the beginning of the quest to understand the enigmas of this fascinating region of the brain.

The causes of epilepsy: changing concepts of etiology of epilepsy over the past 150 years.

This paper provides a survey of the changing concepts of the etiology of epilepsy from 1860 to 2010, focusing on the first two 50-year periods and outlining more briefly major developments in the past 50 years. Among the concepts reviewed in the first 100 years are: the division between predisposing and exciting causes, idiopathic and genuine epilepsy, organic epilepsy, the concept of "cause" being equivalent to "causal mechanism," Russell Reynolds etiological classification, the neurological taint and theories of degeneration, the self-perpetuating nature of seizures, reflex theories of etiology, autointoxication, heredity and eugenics, epilepsy due to brain disorders, the role of EEG and of hippocampal sclerosis, psychological theories of causation, and the multifactorial view of epilepsy etiology. In the past 50 years, the major advances in studying causation in epilepsy have been: clinical biochemistry, neuroimaging, molecular genetics, studies of mechanisms of epilepsy, better statistical methodologies and classification. A number of general observations can be made: the identification of "cause" is not as simple as it might at first appear; progress in the study of causation has been often erratic and travelled up many cul-de-sacs; theories of causation are heavily influenced by societal influences and fashion, and is also heavily dependent on applied methodologies; the recently explored possibility that the underlying inherited mechanisms of epilepsy are shared with other neuropsychiatric conditions is in effect a reinvention of the concept of the neurological trait, and this has ethical and social implications. Considering and classifying cause in terms of causal mechanism, as was suggested by Hughlings Jackson, is an ultimate goal.

Historical perspective: neurological advances from studies of war injuries and illnesses.

Early in the 20th century during the Russo-Japanese War and World War I (WWI), some of the most important, lasting contributions to clinical neurology were descriptive clinical studies, especially those concerning war-related peripheral nerve disorders (eg, Hoffmann-Tinel sign, Guillain-Barré-Strohl syndrome [GBS]) and occipital bullet wounds (eg, the retinal projection on the cortex by Inouye and later by Holmes and Lister, and the functional partitioning of visual processes in the occipital cortex by Riddoch), but there were also other important descriptive studies concerning war-related aphasia, cerebellar injuries, and spinal cord injuries (eg, cerebellar injuries by Holmes, and autonomic dysreflexia by Head and Riddoch). Later progress, during and shortly after World War II (WWII), included major progress in understanding the pathophysiology of traumatic brain injuries by Denny-Brown, Russell, and Holbourn, pioneering accident injury studies by Cairns and Holbourn, promulgation of helmets to prevent motorcycle injuries by Cairns, development of comprehensive multidisciplinary neurorehabilitation by Rusk, and development of spinal cord injury care by Munro, Guttman, and Bors. These studies and developments were possible only because of the large number of cases that allowed individual physicians the opportunity to collect, collate, and synthesize observations of numerous cases in a short span of time. Such studies also required dedicated, disciplined, and knowledgeable investigators who made the most out of their opportunities to systematically assess large numbers of seriously ill and injured soldiers under stressful and often overtly dangerous situations.

The traumatic brain injury model systems: history and contributions to clinical service and research.

The model systems (MSs) of care for traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a demonstration program started by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research in 1987 to improve care and outcomes for individuals with TBI, from emergency services through life-long follow-up. Over the next 20 years, the program increased in size, and the emphasis shifted from demonstration to research. The focal point of that research is the National Data Base, a longitudinal database including nearly 9000 individuals who were admitted for inpatient acute TBI rehabilitation. In addition to preinjury, injury, acute care, and rehabilitation information, the database includes reports of outcomes at 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, etc, years postinjury. The National Data Base criteria, main contents, and mechanisms used to improve data quantity and quality are described. The MSs' other research is described: local (site-specific), module, and collaborative, with illustrative glimpses of the content. The impact of the TBI MSs program, through dissemination, knowledge translation, training of clinicians and researchers, as well as consulting with policy makers, administrators, clinicians, and researchers is discussed.

An historical context of modern principles in the management of intracranial injury from projectiles.

The contemporary management of projectile head injuries owes much to the lessons neurosurgeons have distilled from their experiences in war. Through early investigation and an increasingly detailed account of wartime clinical experience, neurosurgeons--including the field's early giants--began to gain a greater understanding not only of intracranial missile pathophysiology but also of appropriate management. In this paper, the authors trace the development of the principles of managing intracranial projectile injury from the Crimean War in the 19th century through the Vietnam War to provide a context that frames a summary of today's core management principles.

What makes Maurice Ravel's deadly craniotomy interesting? Concerns of one of the most famous craniotomies in history.

Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), the great impressionist-classicist composer of many popular compositions, such as the Boléro, suffered from a progressive disease and died following an exploratory craniotomy by Clovis Vincent. The history of his progressive dementia and the contribution of a car accident, following which he was unable to function, have received a certain amount of interest in the neurological literature previously, but his deadly craniotomy was not evaluated from a neurosurgery perspective. The car accident in 1932, with the probable consequence of a mild-to-moderate traumatic brain injury, could be the key event in his life, triggering the loss of his ability to compose. It is clear that he never recovered from his injury and within a year he became completely unable to function. His dementia progressed dramatically. This event needs to be kept in mind. In 1937, Ravel died after the craniotomy performed by Vincent, but only a speculative, retrospective diagnosis is possible since an autopsy was not undertaken.

Rehabilitating Phineas Gage.

The view that Phineas Gage's accident made him permanently "no longer Gage" is scrutinised critically. Re-examination of the well-known older evidence together with a consideration of new material strongly implies that Gage eventually made a surprisingly good psychosocial adaptation to his injury. It is argued that the structure provided by the external circumstances of his work facilitated this result. Parallels are drawn with the theory and practice of modern rehabilitation which began with Luria.

Training everyday communication partners for individuals with traumatic brain injury: the influence of Mark Ylvisaker.

This lead article outlines some of the seminal concepts introduced by Mark Ylvisaker in collaboration with his colleague Tim Feeney and describes the influence of this work on the development of an everyday communication partner-training program for families and social networks of people with traumatic brain injury.

The positive behavioral momentum of Mark Ylvisaker.

Mark Ylvisaker inspired many people to believe they had the skills to help children and adults with brain injury live a meaningful life. He was thoroughly multidisciplinary in his approach, but also felt strongly that communication was the cornerstone of effective behavior management and that speech-language pathologists could make a unique contribution in the everyday lives of individuals with cognitive-communication disorders. This article recognizes his profound influence on the author's research, teaching, and clinical practice and was written in the spirit of paying forward the knowledge he shared.

Dogs and other metaphors: reflections on the influence of Mark Ylvisaker.

Mark Ylvisaker's death in 2009 marked the sad cessation of a prolific and rich discourse regarding what matters in brain injury rehabilitation. In this article, I reflect on how my own work has converged with and been influenced by this great thinker and doer. My own work, like Ylvisaker's, has been oriented toward finding contextually relevant ways of assessing and remediating communication and social impairments in people with severe traumatic brain injury. In this article, common themes between Ylvisaker's work and my own are explored, including the usefulness of pragmatic language theory, which helps clarify why context is important when determining whether language is appropriate or not, and also to help reveal where problems occur in the use of subtle, diplomatic, or inferred meanings. This article also reflects upon Ylvisaker's models for remediation and the extent to which these can be encompassed within (as well as shape) more traditional models of social skills training.