Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:55:16.722Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part II - Neurosurgery-Specific Bioethics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2020

Edited by
Stephen Honeybul
Stephen Honeybul
Affiliation:
Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Royal Perth and Fiona Stanley Hospitals
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Ethics in Neurosurgical Practice , pp. 95 - 204
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

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

References

Jonsen, A. R. A Short History of Medical Ethics. New York, Oxford, 2000.Google Scholar
Starr, P. The Social Transformation of American Medicine. New York, Basic/Perseus, 1984.Google Scholar
Pinkus, R. L. Politics, paternalism, and the rise of the neurosurgeon: the evolution of moral reasoning. Med. Humanit. Rev. 1996; Fall: 20–44.Google Scholar
Long, D. M. The founding philosophy of neurosurgery. In Philosophy of Neurological Surgery. Awad, I, ed. Park Ridge, AANS, 1995.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, S. H. Neurosurgery’s ideals in historical perspective. In Philosophy of Neurological Surgery. Awad, I, ed. Park Ridge, AANS, 1995.Google Scholar
Harbaugh, R. E. Neurosurgery’s founding principles: the 2015 AANS presidential address. J. Neurosurg. 2015; 123: 1351–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maxwell, R. E. Patient-centered neurosurgery. In Philosophy of Neurological Surgery. I. Awad, ed. Park Ridge, AANS, 1995.Google Scholar
Awad, I. A. Conceptual synthesis: elements of a philosophy of neurological surgery. In Philosophy of Neurological Surgery. Awad, I, ed. Park Ridge, AANS, 1995.Google Scholar
Agarwal, P., Sarris, C. E, Herschman, Y., Agaral, N., et al. Schizophrenia and neurosurgery: a dark past with hope of a brighter future. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2016; 34: 53–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caruso, J. P., Sheehan, J. P. Psychosurgery, ethics, and media: a history of Walter Freeman and the lobotomy. Neurosurg. Focus 2017; 43(3): E6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, D., Schafer, G. Egas Moniz (1874–1955) and the ‘invention’ of modern psychosurgery: a historical and ethical reanalysis under special consideration of Portuguese original sources. Neurosurg. Focus 2011; 30(2): E8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonsen, A. R. The birth of bioethics. New York, Oxford, 1998.Google Scholar
Sedney, C. L., Bernstein, M. Wilder Penfield – bioethicist. Can. J. Neurol. Sci. 2014; 41: 177–81.Google Scholar
Proceedings: Dartmouth Convocation on Great Issues of Conscience in Modern Medicine. The Dartmouth Convocation in Hanover. 8–10 September 1960.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. Something Hidden: A Biography of Wilder Penfield. Garden City, Doubleday, 1981.Google Scholar
Fins, J. J. A leg to stand on: Sir William Osler and Wilder Penfield’s ‘neuroethics’. Am. J. Bioeth. 2008; 8(1): 37–46.Google Scholar
Ad Hoc Committee of the Harvard Medical School to Examine the Definition of Brain Death. A definition of irreversible coma. JAMA 1968; 205(6): 337–40.Google Scholar
Malchesky, P. S., Robert, J. White: renowned neurosurgeon, author, bioethicist, medical adviser to popes. A man for all seasons. Artificial Organs. 2011; 35(1): 1–3.Google Scholar
Patterson, R. H. A code of ethics; the 1986 AANS presidential address. J. Neurosurg. 1986; 65: 271–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
AANS Board of Directors. AANS Code of Ethics. Revised 2014. Available at: www.aans.org/-/media/Images/AANS/Header/Govenance/AANS_Code_of_Ethics_11–22-2014.ashx?la=en&hash=124B159D6B41ACF78DFB0110EB55B10E68D5D3DD.Google Scholar
WFNS Committee for Ethics and Medico-Legal Affairs. Statement of Ethics in Neurosurgery. Revised 2007. Available at: www.wfns.org/WFNSData/Document/Statement_of_Ethics_in_Neurosurgery.pdf.Google Scholar

References

Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2007; 455: 3–5.Google Scholar
Yarascavitch, B. A., Chuback, J. E., Almenawer, S. A., et al. Levels of evidence in the neurosurgical literature: more tribulations than trials. Neurosurgery 2012; 71: 1131–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhandari, M., Joensson, A. Clinical Research for Surgeons. New York, Thieme, 2009.Google Scholar
Haines, S. Evidence-based practice of neurosurgery: implications for quality and safety. In Guillaume, D., Hunt, M., eds. Quality and Safety in Neurosurgery. 1st ed. Minneapolis, Elsevier, 2018: 98–105.Google Scholar
Fletcher, R. H., Fletcher, S. W., Fletcher, G. S. Clinical Epidemiology: The Essentials. 5th ed. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005.Google Scholar
Esene, I. N., El-Shehaby, A. M., Baeesa, S. S. Essentials of research methods in neurosurgery and allied sciences for research, appraisal and application of scientific information to patient care (Part I). Neurosciences (Riyadh) 2016; 21: 97–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linskey, M. E. Evidence-based medicine for neurosurgeons: introduction and methodology. Prog. Neurol. Surg. 2006; 19: 1–53.Google Scholar
Esene, I. N., Baeesa, S. S., Ammar, A. Evidence-based neurosurgery. Basic concepts for the appraisal and application of scientific information to patient care (Part II). Neurosciences (Riyadh) 2016; 21: 197–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ho, P. M., Peterson, P. N., Masoudi, F. A. Evaluating the evidence: is there a rigid hierarchy? Circulation 2008; 118: 1675–84.Google Scholar
Haines, S. J. Evidence-based neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 2003; 52: 36–47.Google Scholar
Kaiser, M. G., Eck, J. C., Groff, M. W., et al. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 1: introduction and methodology. J. Neurosurg. Spine 2014; 21: 2–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carney, N. A., B. T. Foundation. Surgeons AAoN, Surgeons CoN, Joint Section on Neurotrauma and Critical Care AANSC. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. Methods. J. Neurotrauma 2007; 24 Suppl 1: S3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. D., Kalkanis, S. N., Linskey, M. E., et al. Methodology used to develop the AANS/CNS management of brain metastases evidence-based clinical practice parameter guidelines. J. Neurooncol. 2010; 96: 11–16.Google Scholar
Akobeng, A. K. Understanding randomised controlled trials. Arch. Dis. Child 2005; 90: 840–4.Google Scholar
Carney, N., Totten, A. M., O’Reilly, C., et al. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. Neurosurgery 2017; 80: 6–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandenbroucke, J. P. STREGA, STROBE, STARD, SQUIRE, MOOSE, PRISMA, GNOSIS, TREND, ORION, COREQ, QUOROM, REMARK … and CONSORT: for whom does the guideline toll? J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2009; 62: 594–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mannocci, A., Saulle, R., Colamesta, V., et al. What is the impact of reporting guidelines on Public Health journals in Europe? The case of STROBE, CONSORT and PRISMA. J. Public Health (Oxf.). 2015; 37: 737–40.Google ScholarPubMed
Kochanek, P. M., Carney, N., et al. Guidelines for the acute medical management of severe traumatic brain injury in infants, children, and adolescents-second edition. Pediatr. Crit. Care Med. 2012; 13 Suppl 1: S1–82.Google Scholar
Eddy, D. M. Clinical decision-making: from theory to practice. Designing a practice policy. Standards, guidelines, and options. JAMA 1990; 263: 3077, 81–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenberg, S. Handbook of Neurosurgery. 8th ed. New York, Thieme, 2016.Google Scholar
Anderson, P. A., Matz, P. G., Groff, M. W., et al. Laminectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical degenerative myelopathy. J. Neurosurg. Spine 2009; 11: 150–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenberg, J., Greenberg, M. K. Practice parameters: strategies for survival into the nineties. Neurology 1992; 42: 1110–15.Google Scholar
Guyatt, G., Oxman, A. D., Akl, E. A., et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 383–94.Google Scholar
Amanda, B. What Is Critical Appraisal? 2nd ed. Calgary, Hayward Medical Communications, 2012.Google Scholar
Poolman, R. W., Petrisor, B. A., Marti, R. K., et al. Misconceptions about practicing evidence-based orthopedic surgery. Acta. Orthop. 2007; 78: 2–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grol, R., Between evidence-based practice and total quality management: the implementation of cost-effective care. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2000; 12: 297–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmermans, S., Mauck, A. The promises and pitfalls of evidence-based medicine. Health Aff. (Millwood) 2005; 24: 18–28.Google Scholar
Charlton, B. G. Restoring the balance: evidence-based medicine put in its place. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 1997; 3: 87–98.Google Scholar

References

Beauchamp, T. L., Childress, J. F. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 6th ed. New York, Oxford University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Faden, R., Shebaya, S. Public Health Ethics, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2016 Edition, Ed. Zalta, E. N. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/publichealth-ethics.Google Scholar
Mandonnet, E., Taillandier, L., Duffau, H. Proposal of screening for diffuse low-grade gliomas in the population from 20 to 40 years. Presse. Med. 2017; 46: 911–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emanuel, E. J., Wendler, D., Grady, C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA 2000; 283: 2701–11.Google Scholar
Broekman, M. L., Carrière, M. E., Bredenoord, A. L. Surgical innovation: the ethical agenda. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95: e3790.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brennum, J., Engelmann, C. M., Thomsen, J. A., et al. Glioma surgery with intraoperative mapping-balancing the onco-functional choice. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2018; 160: 1043–50.Google Scholar
Cote, D. J., Balak, N., Brennum, J., et al. Ethical difficulties in the innovative surgical treatment of patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J. Neurosurg. 2017; 126: 2045–50.Google Scholar
Brennum, J., Maier, C. M., Almdal, K., et al. Primo non nocere or maximum survival in grade 2 gliomas? A medical ethical question. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2014; 157: 155–64.Google Scholar
Muskens, I. S., Diedersen, S. J. H., Senders, J. T., et al. Innovation in neurosurgery: less than IDEAL? A systematic review. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2017; 159: 1957–66.Google Scholar
Muskens, I. S., Gupta, S., Hulsbergen, A., et al. Introduction of novel medical devices in surgery: ethical challenges of current oversight and regulation. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2017; 225: 556–8.Google Scholar
Gupta, S., Muskens, I. S., Fandino, L. B., et al. Oversight in surgical innovation: a response to ethical challenges. World J. Surg. 2018; 42: 2773–80.Google Scholar
Zaki, M. M., Cote, D. J., Muskens, I. S., et al. Defining innovation in neurosurgery: results from an international survey. World Neurosurg. 2018; 114: e1038–48.Google Scholar

References

Bratton, S. L., Chestnut, R. M., Ghajar, J., et al. Brain trauma foundation; American association of neurological surgeons; congress of neurological surgeons; joint section on neurotrauma and critical care, AANS/CNS. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. J. Neurotrauma. 2007; 24, suppl. 1s.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., An update on the management of traumatic brain injury. J. Neurosurg. Sci. 2011; 55: 343–55.Google Scholar
Chesnut, R. M., Temkin, N., Carney, N., et al. A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012; 367: 2471–81.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S. Reconsidering the role of hypothermia in management of severe traumatic brain injury. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2016; 28: 12–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, D. J., Rosenfeld, J. V., Murray, L., et al. Decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. the DECRA Trial Investigators and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011; 364: 1493–1502.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, P. J., Kolias, A. G., Timofeev, I. S., et al. RESCUEicp trial collaborators. Trial of decompressive craniectomy for traumatic intracranial hypertension. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016; 375: 1119–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M., Gillett, G. R. Long-term outcome following decompressive craniectomy: an inconvenient truth? Curr. Opin. Crit. Care 2018; 24: 97–104.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Gillett, G. R., Ho, K. M., et al. Is life worth living? Decompressive craniectomy and the disability paradox. J. Neurosurg. 2016; 125: 775–8.Google Scholar
Perel, P., Arango, M., Clayton, T., et al. Predicting outcome after brain injury: Practical prognostic models based on a large cohort of international patients. BMJ 2008; 336: 425–9.Google Scholar
Murray, G. D., Butcher, I., McHugh, G. S., et al. Multivariable prognostic analysis in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT study. J. Neurotrauma 2007; 24: 329–37.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M. Predicting long-term neurological outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury requiring decompressive craniectomy: A comparison of the CRASH and IMPACT prognostic models. Injury 2016; 47: 1886–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

Moussaddy, A., Demchuk, A. M., Hill, M. D. Thrombolytic therapies for ischaemic stroke: triumphs and future challenges. Neuropharmacology 2018; 134(part B): 272–9.Google Scholar
Goyal, M., Menon, B. K., van Zwam, W. H., et al. HERMES collaborators. Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet 2016; 387: 1723–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhatia, R., Hill, M. D., Shobha, N., et al. Low rates of acute recanalization with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in ischaemic stroke: real-world experience and a call for action. Stroke 2010; 41: 2254–8.Google Scholar
Vahedi, K., Vicaut, E., Mateo, J., et al. DECIMAL Investigators. Sequential-design, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of early decompressive craniectomy in malignant middle cerebral artery infarction (DECIMAL Trial). Stroke 2007; 38: 2506–17.Google Scholar
Jüttler, E., Schwab, S., Schmiedek, P., et al. DESTINY study group. Decompressive surgery for the treatment of malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery (destiny): a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke 2007; 38: 2518–25.Google Scholar
Hofmeijer, J., Kappelle, L. J., Algra, A., et al. HAMLET investigators. Surgical decompression for space-occupying cerebral infarction (the Hemicraniectomy After Middle Cerebral Artery infarction with Life-threatening Edema Trial [HAMLET]): a multicentre, open, randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2009; 8: 326–33.Google Scholar
Vahedi, K., Hofmeijer, J., Juettler, E., et al. DECIMAL, DESTINY, and HAMLET investigators. Early decompressive surgery in malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery: a pooled analysis of three randomised controlled trials. Lancet Neurol 2007; 6: 215–22.Google Scholar
Jüttler, E., Unterberg, A., Woitzik, J., et al. DESTINY II Investigators. Hemicraniectomy in older patients with extensive middle-cerebral-artery stroke. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014; 370: 1091–100.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M., Gillett, G. Outcome following decompressive hemicraniectomy for malignant cerebral infarction: ethical considerations. Stroke 2015; 46: 2695–8.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M., Gillett, G. R. Long-term outcome following decompressive craniectomy: An inconvenient truth? Curr. Opin. Crit. Care 2018; 24: 97–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauchamp, T. L., Childress, J. F. The meaning and justification of informed consent. In Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 5th ed. New York, Oxford University Press, 2001, 69–98.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R. Life past reason. In Life’s Dominion: An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1993, 218–37.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M., Blacker, B. W., ORACLE stroke study: opinion regarding acceptable outcome following decompressive hemicraniectomy for ischaemic stroke. Neurosurgery 2016; 79: 231–6.Google Scholar
Olivecrona, M., Honeybul, S. A study of the opinions of Swedish healthcare personnel regarding acceptable outcome following decompressive hemicraniectomy for ischaemic stroke. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2018; 160: 95–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

Guglielmi, G. History of the genesis of detachable coils. J. Neurosurg. 2009; 111: 1–8.Google Scholar
Koivisto, T., Vanninen, R., Hurskainen, H., et al. Outcomes of early endovascular versus surgical treatment of ruptured cerebral aneurysms. A prospective randomized study. Stroke 2000; 31: 2369–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molyneux, A., Kerr, R., Stratton, I., et al. International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) Collaborative Group. International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 1267–74.Google Scholar
McDougall, C. G., Spetzler, R. F., Zabramski, J. M., et al. The Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial. J. Neurosurg. 2012; 116: 135–44.Google Scholar
Clifton, G. L., Miller, E. R., Choi, S. C., et al. Lack of effect of induction of hypothermia after acute brain injury. N. Engl. J. Med. 2001; 344: 556–63.Google Scholar
Clifton, G. L., Valadka, A., Zygun, D., et al. Very early hypothermia induction in patients with severe brain injury (the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II): a randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2011; 10: 131–9.Google Scholar
Roberts, I., Yates, D., Sandercock, P., et al. CRASH trial collaborators. Effect of intravenous corticosteroids on death within 14 days in 10008 adults with clinically significant head injury (MRC CRASH trial): randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 364: 1321–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Darsaut, T. E., Jack, A. S., Kerr, R. S., et al. International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial – ISAT part II: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2013; 14: 156.Google Scholar

References

Yamasaki, M. Life and medical ethics in pediatric neurosurgery. Neurol. Med. Chir. (Tokyo) 2017; 57: 101–5.Google Scholar
McDonald, P., Gupta, N., Peacock, W. Ethical issues in pediatric neurosurgery. In Principles and Practice of Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2nd ed., Albright, A. L., Adelson, P. D., Pollack, I. F., eds. New York: Thieme; 2008.Google Scholar
McLone, D. G. The diagnosis, prognosis, and outcome for the handicapped newborn: a neonatal view. Issues Law Med. 1986; 2: 15–24.Google Scholar
Ingraham, F. D., Matson, D. D. Neurosurgery of Infancy and Childhood. Springfield, IL, Charles C. Thomas, 1954.Google Scholar
Lorber, J. Selective treatment of myelomeningocele: To treat or not to treat? Pediatrics 1974; 53: 307–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, A., Butt, W., Rosenfeld, J., et al. A randomised trial of very early decompressive craniectomy in children with traumatic brain injury and sustained intracranial hypertension. Childs Nerv. Syst. 2001; 17: 154–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adzick, N. S., Thom, E. A., Spong, C. Y., et al. MOMS Investigators. A randomised trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011; 364: 993–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, E., Sauer, P. J. The Groningen protocol: euthanasia in severely ill newborns. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005; 352: 959–62.Google Scholar
Nakagawa, T. A., Ashwal, S., Mathur, M., et al. Committee for Determination of Brain Death in Infants’ guidelines for the determination of brain death in infants and children: an update of the 1987 task force recommendations – executive summary. Ann. Neurol. 2012; 71: 573–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katz, A. L., Webb, S. A. Committee on bioethics. Informed consent in decision-making in pediatric practice. Pediatrics 2016; 138(2).Google Scholar
Barry, S. Quality of life and myelomeningocele: an ethical and evidence-based analysis of the Groningen Protocol. Pediatr. Neurosurg. 2010; 46: 409–14.Google Scholar
Cote, D. J., Balak, N., Brennum, J., et al. Ethical difficulties in the innovative surgical treatment of patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J. Neurosurg. 2017; 126: 2045–50.Google Scholar

References

Park, J., Park, H. Surgical informed consent process in neurosurgery. J. Korean Neurosurg. Soc. 2017; 60(4): 385–90.Google Scholar
Kelly, M. P., Lenke, L. G., Godzik, J., et al. Retrospective analysis underestimates neurological deficits in complex spinal deformity surgery; a Scoli-RISK-1 Study. J. Neurosurg. Spine 2017; 27 : 68–73.Google Scholar
Scheer, J. K., Keefe, M., Lafage, V., et al. Importance of patient-reported individualized goals when assessing outcomes for adult spinal deformity (ASD): initial experience with a Patient Generated Index. Spine J. 2017; 17(10): 1397–1405.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, Free Press, 2003.Google Scholar
United States Senate Finance Committee. Staff report on Medtronic’s influence on INFUSE clinical studies. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 2013; 19(2): 67–76.Google Scholar
Walcott, B. P., Sheth, S. A., Nahed, B. V., et al. Conflict of interest in spine research reporting. PLoS One 2012; 7(8): e44327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartels, R. H., Delye, H., Boogaarts, J. Financial disclosures of authors involved in spine research: an underestimated source of bias. Eur. Spine J. 2012; 21 : 1229–33.Google Scholar
Janssen, S. J., Bredenoord, A. L., Dhert, W., et al. Potential conflicts of interest of editorial board members from five leading spine journals. PLoS One 2015; 10(6): e0127362.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. K., Hurwitz, E. L., Schoene, M. L., et al. Moving forward after YODA. Spine J. 2013; 13 : 995–7.Google Scholar
Lenza, M., Buchbinder, R., Staples, M. P., et al. Second opinion for degenerative spinal conditions: an option or a necessity? A prospective observational study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord. 2017; 18: 354.Google Scholar
Schallmo, M. S., Cook, R. W., Weiner, J. A., et al. Do demographic factors of spine surgeons affect the rate at which spinal fusion is performed on patients? Spine 2017; 42(16): 1261–6.Google Scholar
Yanamadala, V., Kim, Y., Buchlak, Q. D., et al. Multidisciplinary evaluation ideas to the decreased utilization of lumbar spine fusion: an observational cohort pilot study. Spine 2017; 42(17): E1016–23.Google Scholar
Schofferman, J. A., Eskay-Auerback, M. L., Sawyer, L. S., et al. Conflict of interest and professional medical associations: the North American Spine Society experience. Spine J. 2013; 13 : 974–9.Google Scholar
Bartels, R. H. Influence of industry on scientific reports. Eur. Spine. J. 2013; 22: 1690–1.Google Scholar

References

Burchiel, K. J. Deep brain stimulation and depression. J. Neurosurg. 2012; 116: 313–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delaloye, S., Holtzheimer, P. E. Deep brain stimulation in the treatment of depression. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. 2014; 16: 83–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhn, J., Gründler, T. O., Lenartz, J., et al. Deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disorders. Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. 2010; 107: 105–13.Google Scholar
Moro, E. Impulse control disorders and subthalamic nucleus stimulation in Parkinson’s disease: are we jumping the gun? Eur. J. Neurol. 2009; 16: 440–1.Google Scholar
Schlaepfer, T. E., Bewernick, B., Kayser, S., et al. Modulating affect, cognition, and behavior – prospects of deep-brain stimulation for treatment – resistant psychiatric disorders. Front. Integr. Neurosci. 2011; 5: 29.Google Scholar
Sen, A. N., Campbell, P. J., Yadla, S., et al. Deep brain stimulation in the management of disorders of consciousness: a review of physiology, previous reports, and ethical considerations. Neurosurg. Focus 2010; 29: E14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clausen, J. Ethical brain stimulation – neuroethics of deep brain stimulation in research and clinical practice. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2010; 32: 1152–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heller, A. C., Amar, A. P., Liu, C. Y., et al. Surgery of the mind and mood: a mosaic of issues in time and evolution. Neurosurgery 2006; 59: 720–39.Google Scholar
Holtzheimer, P. E., Husain, M. M., Lisanby, S. H. et al. Subcallosal cingulate deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a multisite, randomised, sham-controlled trial. The Lancet Psychiatry 2017, 4(11): 839–48.Google Scholar
Egan, D. Adverse effects: The perils of deep brain stimulation for depression. Available at: https://www.madinamerica.com/2015/09/adverse-effects-perils-deep-brain-stimulation.Google Scholar
Gupta, A., Shepard, M. J., Xu, Z. et al. An international radiosurgery research foundation multicentre retrospective study of gamma ventral capsulotomy for obsessive compulsive disorder. Neurosurgery 2018; 85(6): 808–16. doi:10.1093/neuros/nyy536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, A. C., Amar, A. P., Liu, C. Y. et al. Surgery of the mind and mood: a mosaic of issues in time and evolution. Neurosurgery 2006; 59: 720–39.Google Scholar
Fins, J. From psychosurgery to neuromodulation and palliation: History’s lessons for the ethical conduct and regulation of neuropsychiatric research. Neurosurg. Clin. N. Am. 2003; 14: 303–19.Google Scholar
Hunt, G. P. The two accused: the psycho-biology of violence. Life, 21 June 1968. Available at: www.amazon.com/Life-Magazine-Accuese-Psycho-Biology-Violence/dp/B0013SHPPG.Google Scholar
Szasz, T. S. The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct. New York, Harper & Row, 1974.Google Scholar
Laing, R. D., Esterton, A. Sanity, Madness and the Family. London, Tavistock, 1964.Google Scholar
Laing, R. D. The Self and Others. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1969.Google Scholar
Cooper, D. Psychiatry and Anti-Psychiatry. London, Tavistock, 1967.Google Scholar
Breggin, P. R. Psychosurgery as brain-disabling therapy. In Divergent Views in Psychiatry, eds. Dongier, M and Wittkower, E. Hagerstown, MD, Harper and Row, 1981, 302–26. Available at: http://breggin.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/psychosurgeryas.pbreggin.1981.pdf.Google Scholar
Editorial. ‘Psychosurgery.’ Lancet, July 8, 1972, pp. 69–70.Google Scholar
Ryan, J. K. US National Commission for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research. US Statut. Large. 1974; 88: 342–54.Google Scholar
Breggin, P. R. Psychosurgery for political purposes. Duquesne Law Review 1975; 13: 841–62.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. E., Dunn, L. B., Christopher, P. P., et al. The ethics of research on deep brain stimulation for depression: decisional capacity and therapeutic misconception. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 2012; 1265: 69–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuchsa, T., Schlimme, J. E. Embodiment and psychopathology: a phenomenological Perspective. Curr. Opin. Psychiatry 2009; 22: 570–5.Google Scholar
Hansson, S. O. Implant ethics. J. Med. Ethics 2005; 31: 519–25.Google Scholar
Kringelbach, M. L., Aziz, T. Z. Neuroethical principles of deep-brain stimulation. World Neurosurg. 2011; 76: 518–19.Google Scholar
Lipsman, N., Giacobbe, P., Bernstein, M., et al. Informed consent for clinical trials of deep brain stimulation in psychiatric disease: challenges and implications for trial design. J. Med. Ethics 2012; 38: 107–11.Google Scholar
Lipsman, N., Glannon, W., Brain, mind and machine: what are the implications of deep brain stimulation for perceptions of personal identity, agency and free will? Bioethics 2013; 27: 465–70.Google Scholar
Rabins, P., Brian, S., Appleby, J. B., et al. Scientific and ethical issues related to deep brain stimulation for disorders of mood, behavior and thought. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 2009; 66: 931–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmitz-Luhn, B., Katzenmeier, C., Woopen, C. Law and ethics of deep brain stimulation. Int. J. Law and Psychiatry 2012; 35: 130–6.Google Scholar
Clausen, J. Ethical brain stimulation – neuroethics of deep brain stimulation in research and clinical practice. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2010; 32: 1152–62.Google Scholar
Cyron, D. Mental side effects of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for movement disorders: the futility of denial. Front Integr. Neurosci. 2016; 10: 17.Google Scholar
Herzog, J., Reiff, J., Krack, P., et al. Manic episode with psychotic symptoms induced by subthalamic nucleus stimulation in a patient with Parkinson’s disease. Mov. Disord. 2003; 18: 1382–4.Google Scholar
Morgan, J. C., DiDonato, C. J., Iyer, S. S., et al. Self-stimulatory behavior associated with deep brain stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. Mov. Disord. 2006; 21: 283–5.Google Scholar
Schupbach, M., Gargiulo, M., Welter, M. L., et al. Neurosurgery in Parkinson disease: a distressed mind in a repaired body? Neurology 2006; 66: 1811–16.Google Scholar
Witt, K., Daniels, C., Reiff, J. et al. Neuropsychological and psychiatric changes after deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease: a randomised, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol. 2008; 7: 605–14.Google Scholar
Voon, V., Krack, P., Lang, A. E. et al. A multicentre study on suicide outcomes following subthalamic stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. Brain 2008; 131: 2720–8.Google Scholar
Drapier, D., Drapier, S., Sauleau, P. et al. Does subthalamic nucleus stimulation induce apathy in Parkinson’s disease? J. Neurol. 2006; 253: 1083–91.Google Scholar
Florin, E., Muller, D., Pfeifer, J., et al. Subthalamic stimulation modulates self-estimation of patients with Parkinson’s disease and induces risk-seeking behaviour. Brain 2013; 136: 3271–81.Google Scholar
Schupbach, M., Gargiulo, M., Welter, M. L., et al. Neurosurgery in Parkinson disease: a distressed mind in a repaired body? Neurology 2006; 66: 1811–16.Google Scholar
Hobbs, D. What went wrong in the first-ever clinical trial of deep brain stimulation for depression? Available at: http://dig.com/2018/deep-brain-stimulation-depression-trial.Google Scholar
Pacholczyk, A. DBS makes you feel good! – why some of the ethical objections to the use of DBS for neuropsychiatric disorders and enhancement are not convincing. Front Integr. Neurosci. 2011; 5: 14.Google Scholar
Gilbert, F. The burden of normality: from ‘chronically ill’ to ‘symptom free’. New ethical challenges for deep brain stimulation postoperative treatment. J. Med. Ethics 2012; 38: 408–12.Google Scholar
Wilson, S., Bladin, P., Saling, M. The ‘burden of normality’: concepts of adjustment after surgery for seizures. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2001; 70: 649–56.Google Scholar
Komesaroff, P. A. Experiments in Love and Death. Seattle, University of Washington Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Manson, N. C., O’Neill, O. Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. Cambridge, University of Cambridge Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Lipsman, N., Bernstein, M., Lozano, M. Criteria for the ethical conduct of psychiatric neurosurgery clinical trials. Neurosurg. Focus 2010; 29: E9.Google Scholar
Morse, S. J. New therapies, old problems, or, a plea for neuromodesty. AJOB Neuroscience 2012; 3: 60–4.Google Scholar
Laura, Y., Cabrera, H. M. K., Boyce, R. M., et al. Conflicts of interest and industry professional relationships in psychiatric neurosurgery: a comparative literature review. Neurosurg. Focus 2108; 45: E20.Google Scholar
Komesaroff, P. A., Lipworth, W., Kerridge, I. Conflicts of interest: new thinking, new processes. Int. Med. J. 2109; 49(5): 574–7.Google Scholar
Fins, J. J., Schlaepfer, T. E., Nuttin, B., et al. Ethical guidance for the management of conflicts of interest for researchers, engineers and clinicians engaged in the development of therapeutic deep brain stimulation. J. Neural. Eng. 2011; 8: 033001.Google Scholar
Parsons, T. The Social System. Glencoe, IL, Free Press, 1951.Google Scholar
Illich, I. Medical Nemesis. London, Random House, 1976.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. London, Random House, 1988.Google Scholar
Szasz, T. S. The myth of mental illness. American Psychologist 1960; 15: 113–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsman, N., Zener, R., Bernstein, M. Personal identity, enhancement and neurosurgery: a qualitative study in applied neuroethics. Bioethics 2009; 23: 375–83.Google Scholar
Synofzik, M., Schlaepfer, T. E. Stimulating personality: ethical criteria for deep brain stimulation in psychiatric patients and for enhancement purposes. Biotechnol. J. 2008; 3: 1511–20.Google Scholar
Lipsman, N., Bernstein, M., Lozano, M. Criteria for the ethical conduct of psychiatric neurosurgery clinical trials. Neurosurg. Focus 2010; 29: E9.Google Scholar
Rabins, P., Brian, S., Appleby, J. B., et al. Scientific and ethical issues related to deep brain stimulation for disorders of mood, behavior and thought. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 2009; 66: 931–7.Google Scholar
Lipsman, N., Bernstein, M., Lozano, M. Criteria for the ethical conduct of psychiatric neurosurgery clinical trials. Neurosurg. Focus 2010; 29: E9.Google Scholar
Fins, J. From psychosurgery to neuromodulation and palliation: history’s lessons for the ethical conduct and regulation of neuropsychiatric research. Neurosurg. Clin. N. Am. 2003; 14: 303–19.Google Scholar
Bell, E., Racine, E. Ethics guidance for neurological and psychiatric deep brain stimulation. Handbook of Clinical Neurology: Brain Stimulation, Vol. 116, 3rd series, ed. A. M. Lozano, M. Hallett. London, Elsevier, 2013, 313–25.Google Scholar
Synofzika, M., Schlaepferb, T. E. Electrodes in the brain: ethical criteria for research and treatment with deep brain stimulation for neuropsychiatric disorders. Brain Stimul. 2011; 4: 7–16.Google Scholar

References

A definition of irreversible coma. Report of the ad hoc committee of the Harvard Medical School to examine the definition of brain death. JAMA 1968; 205: 337–40.Google Scholar
Diagnosis of brain death. Statement issued by the honorary secretary of the Conference of Medical Royal Colleges and their faculties in the United Kingdom on 11 October 1976. BMJ 1976; 2: 1187–8.Google Scholar
AMA Judicial Council. Ethical guidelines for organ transplantation. JAMA 1968; 205: 341–2.Google Scholar
National Health & Medical Research Foundation. Ethical guidelines for the care of people in post-coma unresponsiveness (vegetative state) or a minimally responsive state. Australian Government Publication, 2008. Available at: www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/ethical-guidelines-care-people-post-coma-unresponsiveness.Google Scholar
Truog, R. D., Miller, F. G. Brain death: justifications and critiques. Clin. Ethics 2012; 7: 128–32Google Scholar
Controversies in the determination of death: a white paper of the President’s Council on Bioethics. 2008. Available at: http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/reports/death/index.html.Google Scholar
Miller, F. G., Truog, R. D., Brock, D. W. The DDR: Can it withstand critical scrutiny? J. Med. Philos. 2010; 35: 299–312.Google Scholar
Truog, R. D. Lessons from the case of Jahi McMath. Defining death; organ transplantation and the fifty-year legacy of the Harvard Report on Brain Death, special report. Hastings Cent. Rep. 2018; 48: S70–3.Google Scholar
Australian Government, National Health and Medical Research Foundation. Organ and tissue donation after death, for transplantation. Guidelines for ethical practice for health professionals. 2007. Available at: www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/e75.pdf.Google Scholar
Abouma, G. M. Recent Pronouncements by Two Major Religions on Organ Transplantation: Current status of Clinical Organ Transplantation. The Hague, Nijhoff, 1984, xi–xii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodek, P. Mandatory reporting of ‘imminent’ death to identify organ donors: history, controversy, and potential solutions. Can. J. Anesth. 2003; 50: 955–60.Google Scholar
Australian Government, Department of Health. Supporting Living Organ Donors Program. 2018. Available at: www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/Leave-for-living-organ-donors.Google Scholar
Brown, S. J. Autonomy, trust and ante-mortem interventions to facilitate organ donation. Clin. Ethics 2018; 13: 143–50.Google Scholar
Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society. The ANZICS Statement on Death and Organ Donation (Edition 3.2). Melbourne, ANZICS, 2013. Available at: https://csds.qld.edu.au/sdc/Provectus/ELI/Module%202%20-%20Organ%20donation%20after%20brain%20death/files/ANZICS%20Statement%20on%20%20Death%20and%20Organ%20Donation%20Edition%203.2%20(3).pdf.Google Scholar
Morrissey, P. E. The case for kidney donation before end-of-life care. Am. J. Bioeth. 2012; 12: 1–8.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×