4.5 Article

Mitochondrial respiratory chain defects: Underlying etiology in various epileptic conditions

期刊

EPILEPSIA
卷 49, 期 4, 页码 685-690

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2007.01522.x

关键词

mitochondrial disorder; respiratory chain; epilepsy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To determine if defects in mitochondrial respiratory chain enzyme complexes (MRCs) contribute to the etiology of childhood epilepsy. Methods: We reviewed the clinical and laboratory features of 48 epileptic patients (23 male, 25 female) with MRC defects that were confirmed by biochemical assays using muscle biopsies. Results: (1) Thirty-five cases (72.9%) were MRC I deficient, one case (2.1%) was MRC II deficient, 11 cases (22.9%) were MRC IV deficient, and one case (2.1%) had combined MRC I and IV deficiencies. (2) In our clinical diagnosis, there were 10 cases (20.8%) with Leigh disease and one case each with myopathy, encephalopathy, lactic acidosis, stroke-like episodes (MELAS) or Alpers' disease (2.1%). Most of the remaining cases (75.0%) had uncategorized mitochondrial cytopathy with nonspecific encephalopathy. (3) For epileptic classification, there were two cases (4.2%) of Ohtahara syndrome, 10 cases (20.8%) of West syndrome, 12 cases (25.0%) of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, two cases (4.2%) of Landau-Kleffner syndrome, 14 cases (29.2%) of generalized epilepsy, and eight cases (16.7%) of partial epilepsy. (4) The mean age of seizure onset was 2.68 +/- 2.21 (range: 1 month - 5.5 years). (5) Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed diffuse cortical atrophy in 34 cases (70.8%), basal ganglia signal changes in 18 cases (37.5%) and thalamus signal changes in 12 cases (25.0%). (6) A ketogenic diet produced clinical improvements, including seizure reduction and global functional improvement in 75% of 24 patients. Conclusions: MRC defects are one of the important causes of probably symptomatic childhood epilepsy. A ketogenic diet should be carefully considered for treatment of intractable epilepsy related to MRC defects.

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

4.5
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