Rezension zu: Inge Govaere and Hanns Ulrich (eds.): Intellectual Property, Public Policy and International Trade

The contemporary intellectual property rights (IPR) system is not a simple, smoothly working block of rules but is complex and full of ambiguities, and as many argue, imperfections. Some deficits relate on the one hand to the inherent centrality of authorship, originality and mercantilism to the ‘Western’ IP model, which leaves numerous non-Western, collaborative or folkloric modes of production outside the scope of protection. On the other hand, some imperfections stem from the way IPR are granted, whereby creators acquire a temporary monopoly over their works and thus exclude the public from having access to them. In this sense, it is often uncertain whether the existent IPR model appropriately reflects the precarious balance between private and public interests, and whether the best incentives to promote creativity and innovation - the initially stated objectives of intellectual property protection - are offered. The matter becomes still more complicated when one considers that the IPR system is not domestically contained but is globalised and strongly affected by rules at the regional and international levels. The question of whether the balance between private interests and public values is sustained within the international legal framework, epitomised by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO), is precisely the topic of the book reviewed here. Review of Intellectual Property, Public Policy, and International Trade, edited by Inge Govaere and Hanns Ullrich, P.I.E. Peter Lang, 2007.

Spinal cerebrospinal fluid leak as the cause of chronic subdural hematomas in nongeriatric patients

OBJECT The etiology of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) in nongeriatric patients (≤ 60 years old) often remains unclear. The primary objective of this study was to identify spinal CSF leaks in young patients, after formulating the hypothesis that spinal CSF leaks are causally related to CSDH. METHODS All consecutive patients 60 years of age or younger who underwent operations for CSDH between September 2009 and April 2011 at Bern University Hospital were included in this prospective cohort study. The patient workup included an extended search for a spinal CSF leak using a systematic algorithm: MRI of the spinal axis with or without intrathecal contrast application, myelography/fluoroscopy, and postmyelography CT. Spinal pathologies were classified according to direct proof of CSF outflow from the intrathecal to the extrathecal space, presence of extrathecal fluid accumulation, presence of spinal meningeal cysts, or no pathological findings. The primary outcome was proof of a CSF leak. RESULTS Twenty-seven patients, with a mean age of 49.6 ± 9.2 years, underwent operations for CSDH. Hematomas were unilateral in 20 patients and bilateral in 7 patients. In 7 (25.9%) of 27 patients, spinal CSF leakage was proven, in 9 patients (33.3%) spinal meningeal cysts in the cervicothoracic region were found, and 3 patients (11.1%) had spinal cysts in the sacral region. The remaining 8 patients (29.6%) showed no pathological findings. CONCLUSIONS The direct proof of spinal CSF leakage in 25.9% of patients suggests that spinal CSF leaks may be a frequent cause of nongeriatric CSDH.

Necessary or unnecessary? a critical glance on spine surgery

Patients with complaints and symptoms caused by spinal degenerative diseases demonstrate a high rate of spontaneous improvement. Except of severe neurological symptoms such as high grade motor deficits, medically intractable pain and vegetative symptoms (cauda syndrome) operations require 1) symptoms, 2) a mechanical cause visible on imaging that sufficiently explains the symptoms, 3) a completed conservative treatment protocol performed over a 4) 6-12 week period. According to the evidence found in the literature, patients with lumbar disk herniation significantly benefit from surgery by a faster relieve of pain and return to social and professional activity, however, the results are converging after a period of 1-2 years. Surgery of lumbar spinal stenosis is considered a gold standard and superior to conservative care when symptoms are severe and leg pain is present. Bilateral microsurgical decompression using a bilateral or a unilateral approach with over-the-top decompression of the contralateral nerve root are superior to laminectomy as the decompression procedure. Lumbar fusion is only indicated in patients with spinal stenosis when a major or mobile spondylolisthesis is diagnosed. There is no indication of prophylactic surgery to avoid a "dangerous" deficit that might develop in the future.