Talk:Acoustic neuroma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neurology. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the talk page. |
| Start | This page has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance assessment scale |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. |
| B | This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance assessment scale |
Adding some things to the first paragraph to lengthen and refine the description. Bdelisle 04:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] I think some information is wrong
The Clinical Manifestations part talks about CN V involvement leading to loss of taste. CN VII carries taste sensation, not CN V. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.170.98.237 (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Requesting Clarification
Under the section on Conservative Treatment, there is a sentence that states,"Since the growth rate of an acoustic neuroma rarely accelerates, annual observation is essential." Does this mean that:
a) because the incidence of accelerated growth rate is so low, no more than a yearly check up is needed,
or,
b) although rare, in some instances the growth rate will accelerate, requiring yearly monitoring?
I know it seems trivial, but as someone who arrived here while attempting to educate myself on a condition I may have, it's a distinction that interests me a great deal at the moment.
Thanks in advance. --69.151.248.177 11:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Misnomer
It isn't a misnomer as far as it being a Schwannoma. Neur- (at least originally) referred to nerves, not neurons. In fact, the word neuroma is older than the word neuron. I believe the modern neuroma refers to both tumors of neuronal origin and glial origin. Mauvila 23:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just wanted to reiterate this point. If you consult a dictionary, you will find it is NOT a "double misnomer". Neur-, neuric, and everything refers to "nerves"...the word originally meant tendon (e.g. aponeurosis), and was also applied to nerves because of their similar appearance. They didn't have microscopes, so they didn't even know the existence of "neurons" at that time. Neuron is a newer word used to describe the cells in a nerve, and also those in the CNS. To repeat, neur- (neuric) refers to nerve, neuronal refers to neurons. And Schwann cells are constituents of nerves, so it is in no way a misnomer as far as the "neuroma" part goes. Mauvila 00:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] see! we can work together lol..
i should give you a award for your editing wolf peace -roy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Royissick (talk • contribs) 22:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
