Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Epilepsia. 2011 Feb;52(2):212-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2010.02900.x. Epub 2011 Jan 4.
Eponyms continue to have their place in medicine but there are pitfalls associated with their use. "Priorities" may be debatable, misattributions are not uncommon, and knowledge of the original papers is often insufficient. A. Ya. Kozhevnikov (1836-1902) is considered to be the founder of the Russian neurology, best known in the West for his work on epilepsia partialis continua (EPC), published in 1894. Kozhevnikov considered various natures for this disorder but thought chronic infectious etiology to be the most probable. Shortly the eponym Kozhevnikov epilepsy was coined and used in clinical practice and writing. Thirty-five years after Kozhevnikov's death, in 1937, a new form of viral encephalitis, Russian spring-summer tick-borne encephalitis (RTBE), was discovered, which was strongly associated with EPC and at times incorrectly attributed to Kozhevnikov by Russian (Soviet) and West-European scientists, although he never specifically identified or even could have recognized this disease entity. When, in 1958, Canadian scientists published about persisting focal epilepsy due to chronic focal encephalitis in children, a new disease was proclaimed: Rasmussen syndrome or Rasmussen chronic encephalitis. The only reference to Kozhevnikov in the Canadian papers was the incorrect suggestion that Kozhevnikov himself described EPC in RTBE. This historical error resulted in continuing misquotations of Kozhevnikov in the current literature and controversies concerning the place of Kozhevnikov epilepsy in the Classification Scheme of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). The history of Kozhevnikov epilepsy thereby offers an illustrative example of the successive misunderstandings, errors, and controversies that arise due to insufficient knowledge or understanding of the original publications, questionable post hoc interpretations of earlier findings, misquoting of secondary papers, or a combination of all these.
虽然以人名命名仍在医学中占有一席之地,但使用人名时也存在一些陷阱。“优先权”可能存在争议,错误归因并不罕见,而且对原始文献的了解往往也不够充分。A.Ya.科热夫尼科夫(1836-1902 年)被认为是俄罗斯神经病学的奠基人,他在西方最为人所知的是他在 1894 年发表的关于连续性部分癫痫(EPC)的工作。科热夫尼科夫对这种疾病的各种性质进行了探讨,但认为慢性感染病因最有可能。不久,科热夫尼科夫癫痫这个以他的名字命名的疾病就被创造出来并在临床实践和文献中使用。在科热夫尼科夫去世 35 年后的 1937 年,一种新的病毒性脑炎,俄罗斯春夏蜱传脑炎(RTBE)被发现,这种疾病与 EPC 密切相关,有时俄罗斯(苏联)和西欧的科学家错误地将其归因于科热夫尼科夫,尽管他从未具体确定或甚至可能识别出这种疾病实体。1958 年,加拿大科学家发表了关于儿童慢性局灶性脑炎持续性局灶性癫痫的文章,宣布了一种新的疾病:拉森综合征或拉森慢性脑炎。加拿大论文中唯一提到科热夫尼科夫的是错误地暗示科热夫尼科夫本人描述了 RTBE 中的 EPC。这一历史错误导致了科热夫尼科夫癫痫在当前文献中的不断错误引用,以及关于科热夫尼科夫癫痫在国际抗癫痫联盟(ILAE)分类方案中的位置的争议。因此,科热夫尼科夫癫痫的历史为我们提供了一个生动的例子,说明了由于对原始出版物的了解或理解不足、对早期发现的可疑事后解释、对次要文献的错误引用,或者所有这些因素的综合作用,会导致连续的误解、错误和争议。