Duyckaerts C, Sazdovitch V, Seilhean D, Delaère P, Hauw J J
Laboratoire de Neuropathologie R. Escourolle, INSERM U360, Hôpital de La Salpêtrière, Paris, France.
J Neural Transm Suppl. 1993;39:107-18.
The Brain Bank of La Salpêtrière Hospital (Paris) is implanted in a neuropathology laboratory. It is multipurpose, prospective, and "free of charge" for the users. Protocols are prospectively established, in collaboration with the neuroscientists. One of our major difficulties in the collection of cases concerns presently the controls: the neurological status of patients coming from Neurology departments has usually been correctly assessed but those patients are bad controls. The normality of the neurological status of patients dying in other departments is difficult to assess retrospectively. A general autopsy is performed in each case. Several systematic sampling and fixation procedures are currently in use; their pros and cons are discussed. The main safety problem we are confronted with is the risk of HIV and Jakob-Creutzfeldt transmission. We try to standardize our diagnostic procedures; criteria used in Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's chorea are briefly reviewed. We plan, in the future, to standardize our procedures for control cases. The Brain Bank has had a very positive impact on the way this neuropathology laboratory works: it introduced new techniques; on the other hand, the adequate processing and diagnosis of the samples was, in many aspects, simplified by the collaboration with the neuropathology department. The demand for human brain samples is steadily increasing in Neuroscience, for at least 2 reasons: 1. some diseases are specifically human and lack adequate animal models (Alzheimer's disease, multisystem atrophy), or animal models may appear irrelevant in some aspects (multiple sclerosis) or finally, results obtained in animal models may have to be confronted with human pathology (AIDS ...) 2. many aspects of human neuroanatomy can not be extrapolated from animal data There are many ways of organizing a brain bank and no golden standard (Swaab et al., 1989): the neuroscientist himself may collect the samples in a given pathology or the neuropathologists may modify their practice to provide adequate samples to the neuroscientists. When the neuroscientist himself collects his own samples, he obviously proceeds more rapidly. However, he is confronted with the difficult problem of the controls, which require both a clinical follow-up and a pathological check up of the tissues, both of which may be difficult to obtain in a research unit. In our opinion, the neuropathologists are the natural "brain bankers": they are indeed naturally "rich", their job being precisely to collect human samples, in connection with the clinicians.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
巴黎萨尔佩特里埃医院脑库设在一个神经病理学实验室。它具有多种用途,是前瞻性的,且对使用者“免费”。方案是与神经科学家合作前瞻性制定的。目前我们在病例收集方面的一个主要困难涉及对照:来自神经科的患者的神经状况通常已得到正确评估,但这些患者作为对照不太理想。在其他科室死亡患者神经状况的正常性很难进行回顾性评估。每个病例都进行全面尸检。目前使用几种系统的采样和固定程序;讨论了它们的优缺点。我们面临的主要安全问题是艾滋病毒和克雅氏病传播的风险。我们试图规范我们的诊断程序;简要回顾了用于阿尔茨海默病、帕金森病、亨廷顿舞蹈病的标准。我们计划在未来规范对照病例的程序。脑库对这个神经病理学实验室的工作方式产生了非常积极的影响:它引入了新技术;另一方面,通过与神经病理科的合作,在许多方面简化了样本的适当处理和诊断。在神经科学领域,对人脑样本的需求在稳步增加,至少有两个原因:1. 一些疾病是人类特有的,缺乏合适的动物模型(阿尔茨海默病、多系统萎缩),或者动物模型在某些方面可能不相关(多发性硬化症),或者最终,在动物模型中获得的结果可能必须与人类病理学进行对比(艾滋病……)2. 人类神经解剖学的许多方面无法从动物数据推断出来。组织脑库有多种方式,没有黄金标准(斯瓦布等人,1989年):神经科学家自己可以在特定病理学中收集样本,或者神经病理学家可以调整他们的做法,为神经科学家提供合适的样本。当神经科学家自己收集样本时,他显然进展更快。然而,他面临着对照的难题,这需要对组织进行临床随访和病理检查,而这两者在研究单位可能都很难做到。在我们看来,神经病理学家是天然的“脑库管理者”:他们确实天然“富有”,他们的工作正是与临床医生合作收集人类样本。(摘要截选至400字)