Objective: To investigate whether the tonic-clonic seizure (TCS) induced by intermittent photic stimulation (IPS)was generalized tonic-clonic seizure (GTCS)or partial secondarily tonic-clonic seizure (PGTCS),and to analyze the relationship between them.
Methods: Video-electroencephalogram (VEEG)database of Peking University First Hospital from March 2010 to October 2018 were reviewed. Fifteen cases with idiopathic epilepsy who had TCS induced by IPS were included in this study, and their clinical and electroencephalogram (EEG)characteristics were retrospectively analyzed.
Results: In this study, 4 of the 15 cases were boys and 11 were girls. The age of seizure onset ranged from 1 to 13 years. According to the medical records: 12 cases were considered as GTCS,while the remaining 3 cases were considered as PGTCS. The age at VEEG monitoring ranged from 2.5 to 16.0 years. All backgrounds of the VEEG were normal. Interictal discharges:generalized discharges in 11 cases, of which 4 cases coexisted with posterior discharges, 2 cases coexisted with Rolandic discharges, the other 5 cases merely had generalized discharges; merely focal discharges in two cases, one in the Rolandic area and the other in the posterior area; no interictal discharge in the remaining 2 cases. IPS induced photoparoxysmal response (PPR)results: 2 cases without PPR,the remaining 13 cases with PPR of generalized discharges, and 6 of the 13 cases coexisted with posterior discharges. IPS induced photoconvulsive response (PCR)results: GTCS in one case (contradictory to medical history),PGTCS in 11 cases (consistent with medical history),and GTCS and PGTCS hardly to distinguish in the remaining 3 cases. Of the three conditions above, there were generalized myoclonic seizures induced by IPS before TCS in 7 cases.
Conclusion: The medical history was unreliable in determining whether TCS was generalized or focal. Myoclonic seizures can coexist with PGTCS, and sometimes GTCS was indistinguishable from PGTCS, indicating that the dichotomy of seizure types need to be improved. Photosensitive TCS should be regarded as a continuum between focal and generalized seizures.
目的: 探讨间断闪光刺激(intermittent photic stimulation,IPS)诱发的强直阵挛发作(tonic-clonic seizures,TCS)是全面强直阵挛发作(generalized tonic-clonic seizures,GTCS)还是局灶继发全面强直阵挛发作(partial secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures,PGTCS)的性质,分析两者之间的关系。
方法: 对2010年3月至2018年10月于北京大学第一医院儿科脑电图病房进行视频脑电图(video electroencephalographic,VEEG)监测的病例进行回顾,共纳入15例在IPS时诱发出TCS的特发性癫痫患儿,对其临床和脑电图特点进行研究。
结果: 15例中男4例,女11例,癫痫起病年龄1~13岁。根据病史归纳出的发作类型为:12例GTCS,3例PGTCS。VEEG监测时年龄 2.5~16.0岁,VEEG背景图形均正常。发作间期放电:11例广泛性放电为主,其中4例共存后头部放电,2例共存Rolandic区放电,5例仅有广泛性放电;2例仅有限局性放电,其中1例限局在Rolandic区、1例限局在后头部;其余2例未监测到间期放电。IPS诱发光阵发性反应(photoparoxysmal response,PPR)结果:2例未监测到PPR,余13例PPR为广泛性放电,其中6例共存后头部放电。IPS诱发的光惊厥性反应(photoconvulsive response,PCR)结果:15例均诱发了以TCS为主的PCR,具体包括:1例GTCS(与病史不一致),11例PGTCS(仅2例与病史一致),3例难以明确区分是GTCS还是PGTCS。上述3种情况中,有7例在IPS诱发出TCS前先诱发了全面性肌阵挛发作。
结论: 通过病史确定TCS是全面性还是局灶性常不可靠;IPS诱发的TCS多为PGTCS而非GTCS;肌阵挛发作与PGTCS可以共存,且有时GTCS和PGTCS难以区分,这些都提示了癫痫发作“二分法”的分型观点有待改变;光敏性TCS更应被视为介于局灶性发作和全面性发作之间的连续统一体。