BACKGROUND: The prevalence of minor physical anomalies (prenatal errors of morphogenesis) was evaluated in patients with idiopathic epilepsy to get indirect data on the possible role of aberrant neurodevelopment in the etiology of the disease. AIM: Connecting to current opinions on a possible role of aberrant neurodevelopment in idiopathic epilepsy it seems important to introduce somatic trait marker research focusing on brain maldevelopment. METHODS: A scale developed by Méhes (1985) was used to detect the presence or absence of 57 minor physical anomalies in 24 patients with idiopathic epilepsy and in 24 matched controls. RESULTS: The mean value of all minor physical anomalies was significantly higher in the group of patients compared to controls. In case of 3 minor physical anomalies we could demonstrate statistically significant differences between children with epilepsy and the control sample. Two minor malformations (primitive shape of ears, double posterior hair whorl) and one phenogenetic variant (inner epicanthic folds) had a significantly higher frequency in patients compared to control individuals. CONCLUSION: The overrepresentation of minor physical anomalies in idiopathic epilepsy can strongly support the view that this disorder is related to pathological factors operating early in development.
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of minor physical anomalies (prenatal errors of morphogenesis) was evaluated in patients with idiopathic epilepsy to get indirect data on the possible role of aberrant neurodevelopment in the etiology of the disease. AIM: Connecting to current opinions on a possible role of aberrant neurodevelopment in idiopathic epilepsy it seems important to introduce somatic trait marker research focusing on brain maldevelopment. METHODS: A scale developed by Méhes (1985) was used to detect the presence or absence of 57 minor physical anomalies in 24 patients with idiopathic epilepsy and in 24 matched controls. RESULTS: The mean value of all minor physical anomalies was significantly higher in the group of patients compared to controls. In case of 3 minor physical anomalies we could demonstrate statistically significant differences between children with epilepsy and the control sample. Two minor malformations (primitive shape of ears, double posterior hair whorl) and one phenogenetic variant (inner epicanthic folds) had a significantly higher frequency in patients compared to control individuals. CONCLUSION: The overrepresentation of minor physical anomalies in idiopathic epilepsy can strongly support the view that this disorder is related to pathological factors operating early in development.