Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T18:22:08.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Relationship Between Prenatal Porencephaly and the Encephalomalacias of Early Life

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

R. M. Norman ,
H. Urich  and
Grace E. Woods
R. M. Norman
Affiliation:
From the Burden Neuropathological Laboratory, Frenchay Hospital, Bristol and the Department of Child Health, Bristol University
H. Urich
Affiliation:
From the Burden Neuropathological Laboratory, Frenchay Hospital, Bristol and the Department of Child Health, Bristol University
Grace E. Woods
Affiliation:
From the Burden Neuropathological Laboratory, Frenchay Hospital, Bristol and the Department of Child Health, Bristol University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the course of time the term “porencephaly” has come to mean a condition characterized by any large circumscribed defect in the substance of the brain. Because of the unmyelinated state of the centrum semiovale in early life traumatic, vascular, anoxic or infective processes are likely to lead to a much more massive resorption of the tissues than occurs in the adult. Parts of the wall of the hemisphere may be converted into a semi-translucent membrane separating the lateral ventricle from the sub-arachnoid space. This thin sheet of neuroglial tissue usually represents the residual stretched out molecular layer of the cortex, and is a finding common to many varieties of infantile and foetal encephalomalacia (Wolf and Cowan, 1956).

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 104 , Issue 436 , July 1958 , pp. 758 - 771
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1958 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becker, H., Dtsch. Z. Nervenheilk., 1949, 161, 446.Google Scholar
Cohn, R., and Neumann, M. A., J. Neuropath. exp. Neurol., 1946, 5, 257.Google Scholar
Diezel, P. B., Virchows Arch. path. Anat., 1954, 325, 109.Google Scholar
Edinger, L., and Fischer, B., Pflugers Arch. ges. Physiol., 1913, 152, 535.Google Scholar
Hallervorden, J., Allg. Ztschr. f. Psychiat., 1949, 124, 289.Google Scholar
Hicks, S. P., Arch. Path., 1954, 57, 363.Google Scholar
Lange-Cosack, H., Arch. f. Psychiat., 1944, 117, 1, 595.Google Scholar
Neuburger, F., Beitr. z. gericht. Med., 1935, 13, 85.Google Scholar
Obersteiner, H., Arb. neurol. Inst., Wien, 1902, 8, 1.Google Scholar
Peters, G., Spezielle Pathologie der Krankheiten des zentralen und peripheren Nervensystems, 1951. Stuttgart: Thieme.Google Scholar
Russell, D. S., “Observations on the Pathology of Hydrocephalus”, Spec. Rep. Ser. Med. Res. Coun., 1949, No. 265. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Smith, H. M., Norman, R. M., and Urich, H., J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 1957, 20, 250.Google Scholar
Spielmeyer, W., Arch. f. Psychiat., 1905, 39, 807.Google Scholar
Tsang, Y., J. Comp. Neurol., 1937, 66, 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, A., and Cowan, D., Proc. Ass. Res. Nerv. Ment. Dis., 1956, 34, 199.Google Scholar
Yakovlev, P., and Wadsworth, R., J. Neuropath. Exp. Neurol., 1946, 5, 116, 169.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.