4.2 Article

Usefulness of ketogenic diet in a girl with migrating partial seizures in infancy

期刊

BRAIN & DEVELOPMENT
卷 38, 期 6, 页码 601-604

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.braindev.2015.12.012

关键词

Migrating partial seizures in infancy (MPSI); Ketogenic diet; Potassium channel subfamily T member 1 (KCNT1); Bromide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Migrating partial seizures in infancy (MPSI) are an age-specific epilepsy syndrome characterized by migrating focal seizures, which are intractable to various antiepileptic drugs and cause severe developmental delay. We report a case of MPSI with heterozygous missense mutation in KCNT1, which was successfully managed by ketogenic diet. At age 2 months, the patient developed epilepsy initially manifesting focal seizures with eye deviation and apnea, then evolving to secondarily generalized clonic convulsion. Various antiepileptic drugs including phenytoin, valproic acid, zonisamide, clobazam, levetiracetam, vitamin B6, and carbamazepine were not effective, but high-dose phenobarbital allowed discontinuation of midazolam infusion. Ictal scalp electroencephalogram showed migrating focal seizures. MPSI was suspected and she was transferred to our hospital for further treatment. Potassium bromide (KBr) was partially effective, but the effect was transient. High-dose KBr caused severe adverse effects such as over-sedation and hypercapnia, with no further effects on the seizures. At age 9 months, we started a ketogenic diet, which improved seizure frequency and severity without obvious adverse effects, allowing her to be discharged from hospital. Ketogenic diet should be tried in patients with MPSI unresponsive to antiepileptic drugs. In MPSI, the difference in treatment response in patients with and those without KCNT1 mutation remains unknown. Accumulation of case reports would contribute to establish effective treatment options for MPSI. (c) 2016 The Japanese Society of Child Neurology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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