Abstract
D'Ambrosio and Miller argue that brief (i.e., one to a few seconds), rhythmic electrographic events accompanied by behavioral arrest, which they have observed in rats after lateral fluid percussion (i.e., in an animal model of traumatic brain injury), should be considered seizures in this model of posttraumatic epilepsy (1). A counter argument is that these events are not characteristic of the seizures seen clinically in posttraumatic epilepsy or in other forms of acquired epilepsy. Furthermore, several types of brief, rhythmic activity can be recorded in the electroencephalogram (EEG) of animals and humans without epilepsy. One cannot exclude the possibility that such events represent normal electrical activity, which may (or even may not) occur more often after brain injury. Thus, caution is required. In this counterpoint to "What Is an Epileptic Seizure?" by D'Ambrosio and Miller, the assertion is made that experimental studies on animal models of acquired epilepsy that claim electrographic events to be seizures, when the possibility exists that they may not be seizures characteristic of human acquired epilepsy, could be counterproductive, since research resources could be focused on animal models that may not actually demonstrate acquired epilepsy.