Bilateral Anterior Thalamic Nucleus Lesions and High-frequency Stimulation Are Protective against Pilocarpine-induced Seizures and Status Epilepticus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The thalamus is thought to play an important role in secondary generalization of seizures. The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of anterior thalamic nucleus lesions and high-frequency stimulation in the pilocarpine model of secondarily generalized seizures in rats. METHODS: Adult Wistar rats underwent unilateral (n = 7) or bilateral anterior nucleus thalamotomies (n = 10), or unilateral (n = 4) or bilateral (n = 9) anterior thalamic nucleus stimulation through implanted electrodes. Control animals (n = 9) received bilateral implants but no stimulation. Seven days after these procedures, animals were provided pilocarpine (320 mg/kg intraperitoneally) to induce seizures and status epilepticus (SE). Electrographic recordings from hippocampal and cortical electrodes were evaluated, and ictal behavior was assessed. RESULTS: In the control group, 67% of the animals developed SE 15.3 +/- 8.8 minutes after pilocarpine administration. Neither unilateral anterior nucleus lesions nor stimulation significantly reduced the propensity or latency for developing seizures and SE. Bilateral thalamic stimulation did not prevent SE (observed in 56% of the animals), but it significantly prolonged the latency to its development (48.4 +/- 17.7 min, P = 0.02). Strikingly, no animal with bilateral anterior nucleus thalamotomies developed seizures or SE with pilocarpine. CONCLUSION: Bilateral anterior thalamic nuclear complex stimulation and thalamotomies were protective against SE induced by pilocarpine.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it