| Literature DB >> 29558884 |
Na He1,2, Bing-Mei Li1,2, Zhao-Xia Li1,2, Jie Wang1,2, Xiao-Rong Liu1,2, Heng Meng1,2,3,4, Bin Tang1,2, Wen-Jun Bian1,2, Yi-Wu Shi1,2, Wei-Ping Liao5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in epilepsy has been a topic of increasing interest, which in general occurs in 15-35% of the patients with epilepsy, more frequently in those with intellectual disability (ID). Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) and Dravet syndrome (DS) are two typical forms of intractable epileptic encephalopathy associated with ID. We previously reported that ASD was diagnosed in 24.3% of patients with DS, higher in those with profound ID. Given the severe epilepsy and high frequency of ID in LGS, it is necessary to know whether ASD is a common psychomotor co-morbidity of LGS. This study evaluated the autistic behaviors and intelligence in patients with LGS and further compared that between LGS and DS, aiming to understand the complex pathogenesis of epilepsy-ASD-ID triad.Entities:
Keywords: Autism spectrum disorder; Dravet syndrome; Epileptic encephalopathy; Intellectual disability; Lennox-Gastaut syndrome
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29558884 PMCID: PMC5859706 DOI: 10.1186/s11689-018-9229-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neurodev Disord ISSN: 1866-1947 Impact factor: 4.025
Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome
| LGS ( | Cryptogenic LGS ( | Symptomatic LGS ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male/female) | 38/12 | 21/7 | 17/5 | 0.852 |
| Age at conclusion of study (years) | 12.9 ± 6.5 | 12.5 ± 6.1 | 13.5 ± 7.1 | 0.875 |
| Age at evaluation (years) | 9.3 ± 6.2 | 9.9 ± 5.6 | 8.4 ± 7.0 | 0.418 |
| Age at seizure onset (months) | 35.3 ± 29.6 | 49.4 ± 29.5 | 17.4 ± 18.1 | 0.007* |
| Seizure type | ||||
| Tonic | 48 (96%) | 26 (92.9%) | 22 (100.0%) | 0.309 |
| GTCS/secondary GTCS | 34 (68%) | 18 (64.3%) | 16 (72.7%) | 0.525 |
| Complex/simple partial | 20 (40%) | 11 (39.3%) | 9 (40.9%) | 0.907 |
| Atypical absence | 20 (40%) | 12 (42.9%) | 8 (36.4%) | 0.642 |
| Myoclonic | 16 (32%) | 8 (28.6%) | 8 (36.4%) | 0.558 |
| Spasms | 12 (24%) | 1 (3.6%) | 11 (50.0%) | 0.001* |
| Drops | 11 (22%) | 5 (17.9%) | 6 (27.3%) | 0.650 |
| Atonic | 8 (16%) | 5 (17.9%) | 3 (13.6%) | 0.988 |
| Status epilepticus | 6 (12%) | 3 (10.7%) | 3 (13.6%) | 1.000 |
| EEG characteristics | ||||
| Slow background activity | 34 (68%) | 18 (64.3%) | 16 (72.7%) | 0.525 |
| Generalized polyspikes | 49 (98%) | 28 (100.0%) | 21 (95.5%) | 0.440 |
| Diffuse SSW pattern | 36 (72%) | 22 (78.6%) | 14 (63.6%) | 0.243 |
| Focal discharges | 43 (86%) | 24 (85.7%) | 19 (86.4%) | 1.000 |
| Burst-suppression pattern | 11 (22%) | 6 (21.4%) | 5 (22.7%) | 1.000 |
| Antiepileptic drugs | ||||
| 2 | 13 (26%) | 10 (35.7%) | 3 (13.6%) | 0.768 |
| ≥ 3 | 37 (74%) | 18 (64.3%) | 19 (86.4%) | |
| Seizure free | 14 (28%) | 13 (46.4%) | 1 (4.5%) | 0.001* |
GTCS generalized tonic-clonic seizure, SSW slow spike-wave
* p < 0.05 (two-sided) was statistically significant
Comparison of clinical features among LGS patients with and without intellectual disability
| Without ID ( | With ID ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male) | 5 (71.4%) | 33 (76.7%) | 1.000 |
| Age at seizure onset (month) | 50.6 ± 35.6 | 26.2 ± 20.0 | 0.009* |
| Age at evaluation (years) | 11.9 ± 8.6 | 8.9 ± 5.8 | 0.400 |
| History of infantile spasms | 0 (0.0%) | 8 (18.6%) | 0.580 |
| Seizure types | |||
| Tonic | 6 (85.7%) | 42 (97.7%) | 0.263 |
| GTCS/secondary GTCS | 5 (71.4%) | 29 (67.4%) | 1.000 |
| Complex partial seizure | 2 (28.6%) | 18 (41.9%) | 0.687 |
| Atypical absence | 4 (57.1%) | 16 (37.2%) | 0.416 |
| Myoclonic | 2 (28.6%) | 14 (32.6%) | 1.000 |
| Spasms | 0 (0.0%) | 12 (27.9%) | 0.174 |
| Drops | 1 (14.3%) | 10 (23.3%) | 1.000 |
| Atonic | 1 (14.3%) | 7 (16.3%) | 1.000 |
| Status epilepticus | 1 (14.3%) | 5 (11.6%) | 1.000 |
| EEG characteristics | |||
| Slow background activity | 4 (57.1%) | 30 (69.8%) | 0.666 |
| Generalized polyspikes | 7 (100.0%) | 42 (97.7%) | 1.000 |
| Diffuse SSW pattern | 6 (85.7%) | 30 (69.8%) | 0.657 |
| Focal discharges | 5 (71.4%) | 38 (88.4%) | 0.250 |
| Burst-suppression pattern | 0 (0.0%) | 11 (25.6%) | 0.324 |
| Antiepileptic drugs | |||
| 2 | 3 (42.9%) | 10 (23.3%) | 0.357 |
| ≥ 3 | 4 (57.1%) | 33 (76.7%) | |
| Etiology | |||
| Symptomatic | 0 (0.0%) | 22 (51.2%) | 0.014* |
| Cryptogenic | 7 (100.0%) | 21 (48.8%) | |
| Seizure free | 4 (57.1%) | 10 (23.3%) | 0.085 |
GTCS generalized tonic-clonic seizure, SSW slow spike-wave
* p < 0.05 (two-sided) was statistically significant
Fig. 1Comparison of ID in patients with cryptogenic LGS and those with symptomatic LGS. The cognitive outcome in patients with cryptogenic LGS was significantly better than that in patients with symptomatic LGS (p = 0.040). In the cryptogenic LGS group, the patients with normal intelligence (7/28) were significantly more than that in symptomatic LGS group (0/22), while the patients with moderate to severe ID (9/28) were significantly less than in the symptomatic LGS group (14/22)
Demographic and clinical features of patients with Dravet syndrome (n = 45)
| Gender (male) | 32 (71.1%) |
| Age at conclusion of study (years) | 11.3 ± 5.1 |
| Age at evaluation (years) | 8.2 ± 3.7 |
| Age at seizure onset (months) | 6.2 ± 3.7 |
| Family history of febrile seizures or epilepsy | 16 (35.6%) |
| Antecedent febrile seizures | 35 (77.8%) |
| Seizure type | |
| GTCS/secondary GTCS | 40 (88.9%) |
| Complex partial | 29 (64.4%) |
| Myoclonic | 18 (40.0%) |
| Atypical absence | 15 (33.3%) |
| Simple partial | 9 (20.0%) |
| Atonic | 4 (8.9%) |
| Tonic | 1 (2.2%) |
| Status epilepticus | 28 (62.2%) |
| EEG characteristics | |
| Normal | 1 (2.2%) |
| Slow background activity | 25 (55.6%) |
| Only focal discharge | 14 (31.1%) |
| Only generalized discharge | 5 (11.1%) |
| Focal and generalized discharge | 25 (55.6%) |
| MRI abnormality | 13 (28.9%) |
| Treatment with ≥ 3 AEDs | 36 (80.0%) |
| Seizure free | 0 (0%) |
Value was expressed as n (%) or means ± SD
AEDs antiepileptic drugs, GTCS generalized tonic-clonic seizure
Fig. 2ASD and ID in patients with LGS and those with DS. No ASD was found in the LGS group (0/50), significantly lower than the prevalence of ASD in DS group (10/45, p < 0.001), while the cognitive outcome in the two groups shows no significantly difference (p = 0.245)