Do Interictal Discharges Promote or Control Seizures? Experimental Evidence from an In Vitro Model of Epileptiform Discharge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interictal and ictal discharges are recorded from limbic structures in temporal lobe epilepsy patients. In clinical practice, interictal spikes are used to localize the epileptogenic area, but they also are assumed to promote ictal events. Here I review data obtained from combined slices of mouse hippocampus-entorhinal cortex that indicate an inverse relation between interictal and ictal events. In this preparation, application of 4-aminopyridine or Mg2+-free medium induce (a) interictal discharges that originated from CA3 and propagate (via the Schaffer collaterals) to CA1 and entorhinal cortex, to return to the hippocampus through the dentate area; and (b) ictal discharges that initiate in the entorhinal cortex and propagate to the hippocampus via the dentate gyrus. Interictal activity occurs throughout the experiment (up to 6 h), whereas ictal discharges disappear after 1-2 h. Schaffer collateral cut abolishes interictal discharges in CA1, entorhinal cortex, and dentate and reestablishes entorhinal ictal discharges. Moreover, ictal discharge generation in the entorhinal cortex after Schaffer collateral cut is prevented by mimicking CA3 activity with rhythmic electrical stimulation of CA1 outputs. Thus hippocampal interictal activity controls the ability of the entorhinal cortex to generate seizures. It also may be proposed that Schaffer collateral cut may model the epileptic condition in which CA3 damage results in loss of hippocampal control over the entorhinal cortex. In conclusion, these experiments demonstrate that interictal activity controls rather than promotes ictal events, and functional integrity of CA3 constitutes a critical control mechanism in temporal lobe epilepsy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".