4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Are absences truly generalized seizures or partial seizures originating from or predominantly involving the pre-motor areas? Some clinical and theoretical observations and their implications for seizure classification

期刊

EPILEPSY RESEARCH
卷 70, 期 -, 页码 S141-S155

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2005.11.018

关键词

absence seizures; generalized seizures; cortico-thalamo-cortical epilepsy; classification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In both the current (1981) ILAE Classification of Epileptic Seizures and the recently Proposed Diagnostic Scheme for People with Epilepsy and Epileptic Seizures, typical absence seizures are defined as generalized seizures, implying widespread subcortical and cortical neuronal involvement from onset with impairment of consciousness as the clinical hallmark. Clinical observations from three patients and clinical and experimental data from the literature suggest, however, that: (1) consciousness is retained in many typical absences; (2) the true hallmark of these seizures is arrest of motor initiation due to disturbance of pre-motor area frontal-lobe function; (3) typical absences and partial seizures from these areas may show similar clinical and EEG features and involve the same neuronal circuits. The neuronal system primarily involved in these seizures consists of a relatively limited cortico-thalamo-cortical circuit, including the reticular thalamic nucleus, the thalamocortical relay and the predominantly anterior and mesial frontal cerebral cortex, with the cortex probably acting as the primary driving site. Typical absences thus should not be classified or defined as generalized seizures, particularly since neuropathological and imaging studies increasingly argue for localized structural abnormalities, even in idiopathic or primary generalized epilepsy. These observations further highlight the intrinsic weaknesses of the current classification system for seizures and support further adaptations of the diagnostic system currently under development. (c) 2006 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