4.3 Article

Encephalitis and myelitis associated with dengue viral infection Clinical and neuroimaging features

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
卷 110, 期 6, 页码 635-640

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2008.03.011

关键词

dengue; encephalitis; myelitis; CT scan; MRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The objective of this study was to identify clinical and neuroima-ing features and outcome of patients with encephalitis and myelitis associated with dengue viral infection. Patients and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 225 cases of dengue viral infection. The diagnosis of dengue was confirmed by serology (presence of IgM antibodies). Results: Six patients (3%) had evidence of neurological infection (encephalitis: 5 patients; encephalomyelitis: I patient). Age range was 18-35 years (Mean 27 years). Five patients (83%) were women. All patients (100%) had drowsiness, five patients (83%) had fever, four patients (67%) presented with seizures and one patient presented with paraparesis (16%). All patients had elevated CSF cell count (range 25-102; mean 61) with predominant lymphocytes. Five patients (83%) had abnormal CT or MRI scan. Cerebral edema was present in three patients. Other findings included low density signals in right temporal and occipital lobe (1 patient), bi temporal hyperintensi ties and meningeal enhancement (1 patient), Frontal and subcortical hyperintense lesion (1 patient) and hyperintense lesion on T2 in Pons and cervical and thoracic spinal cord (1 patient). EEG was done in four patients and showed generalized slowing (2 patients), bi temporal spikes (1 patient) and burst suppression pattern (1 patient). Two patients (32%) died and one patient was discharged in bedridden state. Conclusion: The involvement of brain and spinal cord is uncommon in dengue viral infection. Most patient present with seizures. Neuroirnaging features are diverse. Prognosis is poor in patients presenting with encephalitis or myelitis. (c) 2008 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

4.3
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