4.7 Article

Perilesional brain oedema and seizure activity in patients with calcified neurocysticercosis: a prospective cohort and nested case-control study

期刊

LANCET NEUROLOGY
卷 7, 期 12, 页码 1099-1105

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70243-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. US National Institute of Allergy and infectious Diseases (NIAID)
  2. US National institutes of Health (NIH)
  3. Fogarty International Center [R03 TW05562]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Cysticercosis due to Taenia solium is a cause of adult-acquired seizures and epilepsy even in patients with only calcified larval cysts. Transient perilesional brain oedema is seen around the calcified foci but its importance, association with seizures, incidence, and pathophysiology are unknown. Methods 110 patients with only calcified lesions and a history of seizures or severe headaches were followed prospectively in a cohort design to assess the incidence of seizure relapse. In a nested case-control substudy, perilesional oedema was assessed by MRI at the time of seizure in symptomatic patients and in matched asymptomatic controls taken from the study population. Findings Between November, 1999, and December, 2006, 29 patients had an incident seizure during a median follow up of 32.33 (SD 19.99) months, with an estimated 5-year seizure incidence of 36% (95% CI 25% to 49%). 24 of 29 (83%) patients with seizure relapse had an MRI evaluation within 5 days of the event; perilesional oedema was seen in 12 patients (50%) compared with two (9%) of 23 asymptomatic matched controls. Interpretation Perilesional oedema is common and associated with episodic seizure activity in patients with calcified neurocysticercosis. Our findings are probably representative of symptomatic patients in regions where T solium neurocysticercosis is endemic and suggest a unique and possibly preventable cause of seizures in this population. Funding US National Institute of Allergy and infectious Diseases; US National institutes of Health; Fogarty International Center.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据