Rather than imagine a new substantive to characterise certain of these muscle contractions, we may retain the word in a somewhat wider though equally precise sense, and follow the distinction drawn by Brissaud[9] in 1893: "a spasm is the result of sudden transitory irritation of any point in a reflex arc; ... it is a reflex act of purely spinal or bulbo-spinal origin."
By definition, then, a spasm is the motor reaction consequent on stimulation of some point in a reflex spinal or bulbo-spinal arc. To differentiate between the reflex, which is physiological, and the spasm, which is pathological, we may add as a corollary: the irritation provocative of the spasm is itself of pathological origin, and no spasm can occur without it. The anatomo-pathological substratum of a spasm is, then, some focus of irritation on a spinal or bulbo-spinal reflex arc, which may be situated in peripheral end organ, in centripetal path, in medullary centre, or in centrifugal fibre. Whatever be its localisation, it will determine a spasm in our sense of the word.
Cortical or subcortical excitation, however, as well as peripheral stimuli, may provoke these bulbar and spinal centres to activity. Irritation of a point on the rolandic cortex, or on the cortico-spinal centripetal paths, is followed by a motor reaction exactly as with afferent impulses; the sole change is in the route taken by the centripetal stimulus; the reflex centre remains bulbo-spinal, and the efferent limb of the arc is as before.
The application of the word spasm to these motor responses to cortical or subcortical stimulation is quite justifiable. Developmentally the grey matter of the cerebral convolutions is ectodermic, as is the skin, and capable of functioning as a sensory surface; it may be considered the end organ of an afferent path that conducts to medullary reflex centres. According to our definition, then, provided the centre of the reflex arc be bulbo-spinal and the irritation pathological, the consequent motor phenomenon is a spasm.
A distinction most nevertheless be drawn between the two cases, inasmuch as in the one the afferent path is peripheral, in the other it is cortico-spinal, and there is a corresponding difference in the clinical picture. Jacksonian convulsions, consecutive to cortical stimulation, do not seem to bear much resemblance to spasmodic movements indicative of peripheral—i.e. sensory nerve—irritation. As a matter of fact, it is not always easy to differentiate the two, except by the aid of concomitant phenomena. The characteristic evolution of the Jacksonian convulsion is of course readily recognisable. We can similarly diagnose an irritative lesion of the internal capsule not so much from the objective features of the convulsive movements as from accompanying indications. In short, there need never be any occasion for confusion. Convulsive conditions attributable to irritation of cortico-spinal centripetal paths have long been described and analysed: they constitute well-recognised morbid entities, among which may be enumerated Jacksonian epilepsy, hemichorea, hemiathetosis, pre-and post-hemiplegic hemitremor, etc.
These clinical denominations for the affections under consideration it is at present desirable to retain. We shall not call them spasms; above all, we must not call them tics, else we shall end by confounding conditions absolutely distinct. The case recorded by Lewin,[10] under the title of "convulsive tic," of a three-year-old infant still unable to walk, who has daily attacks in which "all the muscles" twitch for about a minute at a time, is indeed a most singular tic. We were under the impression that such an attack is usually known as an epileptiform convulsion. Is the term "convulsive tic" quite a happy synonym?
Again, in the recent thesis of Cruchet the attempt has been made to base the pathological physiology of tic on researches of von Monakow and Muratow apropos of the occurrence of choreic, epileptoid, or athetotic movements after certain lesions of the cerebro-spinal axis, and to find an analogy in the action of various convulsion-producing substances (Richet and Langlois). Cruchet's conclusion is that convulsive tic is as often cortical or subcortical as spinal in origin; that it is, in short, a mere symptom, common to many cerebro-spinal conditions.
The same regrettable confusion is discernible in various treatises on neuropathology the work of German and other foreign authors.
As far as we are concerned, the outcome of the whole matter is simply this: if tic is doomed to be used indifferently for convulsion, its retention in scientific terminology is unjustifiable. Rather, then, than widen its application, we prefer to restrict it; we shall employ the term convulsion in its most general sense of "any anomaly due to excess of muscular contraction," of whatever variety or origin; and we shall limit the use of the word spasm to phenomena the result of irritation at any point on afferent or efferent reflex paths, or in reflex bulbo-spinal centres.
In thus indicating our position, we find ourselves once more in accord with generally received opinion since the days of Charcot. These views have been excellently expressed by Guinon: