Lobotomy

Abstract: At the peak of his career, Walter J. Freeman II was a celebrated physician and scientist. He served as the first chairman of the Department of Neurology at George Washington University and was a tireless advocate of surgical treatment for mental illness. His eccentric appearance, engaging personality during interviews, and theatrical demonstrations of his surgical techniques gained him substantial popularity with local and national media, and he performed more than 3000 prefrontal and transorbital lobotomies between 1930 and 1960. However, poor patient outcomes, unfavorable portrayals of the lobotomy in literature and film, and increased regulatory scrutiny contributed to the lobotomy's decline in popularity. The development of antipsychotic medications eventually relegated the lobotomy to rare circumstances, and Freeman's reputation deteriorated. Today, despite significant advancements in technique, oversight, and ethical scrutiny, neurosurgical treatment of mental illness still carries a degree of social stigma. This review presents a historical account of Walter Freeman's life and career, and the popularization of the lobotomy in the US. Additionally, the authors pay special attention to the influence of popular literature and film on the public's perception of psychosurgery. Aided by an understanding of this pivotal period in medical history, neurosurgeons are poised to confront the ethical and sociological questions facing psychosurgery as it continues to evolve.

Abstract: Psychosurgery was developed early in human prehistory (trephination) as a need perhaps to alter aberrant behavior and treat mental illness. The “American Crowbar Case” provided an impetus to study the brain and human behavior. The frontal lobe syndrome was avidly studied. Frontal lobotomy was developed in the 1930s for the treatment of mental illness and to solve the pressing problem of overcrowding in mental institutions in an era when no other forms of effective treatment were available. Lobotomy popularized by Dr. Walter Freeman reached a zenith in the 1940s, only to come into disrepute in the late 1950s. Other forms of therapy were needed and psychosurgery evolved into stereotactic functional neurosurgery. A history of these developments up to the 21st century will be related in this three-part essay-editorial, exclusively researched and written for the readers of Surgical Neurology International (SNI).

Abstract: Excerpt Philosophers may argue as to whether pain is a sensation or an emotion. As a sensation it has a threshold, a quality and a localization. Pathways for the transmission of pain run together w...

Abstract: The treatment of psychiatric patients presents significant challenges to the clinical community, and a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis and management is essential to facilitate optimal care. In particular, the neurosurgical treatment of psychiatric disorders, or "psychosurgery," has held fascination throughout human history as a potential method of influencing behavior and consciousness. Early evidence of such procedures can be traced to prehistory, and interest flourished in the nineteenth and early twentieth century with greater insight into cerebral functional and anatomic localization. However, any discussion of psychosurgery invariably invokes controversy, as the widespread and indiscriminate use of the transorbital lobotomy in the mid-twentieth century resulted in profound ethical ramifications that persist to this day. The concurrent development of effective psychopharmacological treatments virtually eliminated the need and desire for psychosurgical procedures, and accordingly the research and practice of psychosurgery was dormant, but not forgotten. There has been a recent resurgence of interest for non-ablative therapies, due in part to modern advances in functional and structural neuroimaging and neuromodulation technology. In particular, deep brain stimulation is a promising treatment paradigm with the potential to modulate abnormal pathways and networks implicated in psychiatric disease states. Although there is enthusiasm regarding these recent advancements, it is important to reflect on the scientific, social, and ethical considerations of this controversial field.