The lacunar hypothesis.

J. Bamford
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.53.9.819
1990-09-01
Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Abstract:ascertain the aetiology. It is true that serology may miss some cases of cysticercosis but our results are not grossly dissimilar. They could demonstrate definite cysticercosis in seven out of 15 cases (46%) while in our series serology was positive in 31%. The number in both studies is relatively small and much should not be made of difference in percentages. In our opinion persistent lesions should not be compared with disappearing lesions as the two may be entirely different. Our hypothesis that contrast enhancement is due to a recent seizure is based on well documented evidence in the literature that seizures lead to transient breakdown in blood-brain barrier. This is supported by observation in at least five patients in whom the lesion disappeared, reappearing after a flurry of seizures to disappear again. We are unable to accept the argument that this could all be due to technical factors as suggested by Drs Rajshekhar and Abraham. Since lesions due to other causes are known to show similar CT morphology,3 it is not wise to state that cysticercosis is the only underlying cause of "disappearing lesions". Larger studies using different strategies are required to answer the question and one such study has been initiated in our department. GK AHUJA M BEHARI K PRASAD RK GOULATIA BANSI L JAILKHANI Department of Neurology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
What problem does this paper attempt to address?