RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Gelastic seizures are extremely rare, short-lasting, unprovoked, and uncontrollable laughing attacks. We conducted this retrospective evaluation to determine whether these symptoms, manifesting in different forms, such as cheerful laughter, laughing, smiling, and sobbing had any value in terms of etiology or localization. METHODS: A total of 31 patients who exhibited bouts of laughing or crying and who were under follow-up between 2000 and 2019 at tertiary epilepsy centers were included in the study. Laughing seizures were divided into three groups in terms of semiology (i.e., laughter with mirth, laughter without mirth, and smile). Dacrystic seizures were accompanied by some gelastic seizures and were divided into two groups in terms of semiology (i.e., weeping loudly [motor and voice-sobbing] and crying). RESULTS: Of the 27 patients with laughing seizures, 12 had seizures that manifested with smiling, 7 had seizures that manifested with laughing and mirth, and 8 had seizures that manifested with laughter without mirth. Dacrystic-gelastic seizures were observed in four patients, among whom 2 patients had crying and laughter without mirth and 2 patients had weeping loudly and laughter without mirth episodes. CONCLUSION: Gelastic and dacrystic seizures often suggest hypothalamic hamartomas, in the literature. This rare ictal behavior can originate from different cortical locations and lesions of a different nature. However, we found that gelastic seizures with smiling were a more homogenous group with regard to location in the temporal lobe, which we aimed to show by evaluating the patients included in this study.
ANTECEDENTES: Crises gelásticas são ataques de riso extremamente raros, de curta duração, não provocados e incontroláveis. Realizamos esta avaliação retrospectiva para determinar se esses sintomas, manifestando-se de diferentes formas, como riso alegre, riso, sorriso e soluço, tinham algum valor em termos de etiologia ou localização. MéTODOS: Foram incluídos no estudo 31 pacientes que apresentavam crises de riso ou choro e que estavam em acompanhamento entre 2000 e 2019 em centros terciários de epilepsia. As crises de riso foram divididas em três grupos em termos de semiologia (ou seja, riso com alegria, riso sem alegria e sorriso). As crises dacrísticas foram acompanhadas por algumas crises gelásticas e foram divididas em dois grupos em termos de semiologia (ou seja, choro alto [motor e soluçar a voz] e choro). RESULTADOS: Dos 27 pacientes com crises de riso, 12 tiveram crises que se manifestaram com sorriso, 7 tiveram crises que se manifestaram com riso e alegria e 8 tiveram crises que se manifestaram com riso sem alegria. Crises dácristico-gelásticas foram observadas em quatro pacientes, sendo 2 pacientes com choro e riso sem alegria e 2 pacientes com choro alto e riso sem alegria. CONCLUSãO: Crises gelásticas e dacrísticas frequentemente sugerem hamartomas hipotalâmicos, na literatura. Este comportamento ictal raro pode ter origem em diferentes localizações corticais e lesões de natureza diversa. No entanto, verificamos que as crises gelásticas com sorriso foram um grupo mais homogêneo quanto à localização no lobo temporal, o que buscamos evidenciar avaliando os pacientes incluídos neste estudo.
Assuntos
Epilepsias Parciais , Doenças Hipotalâmicas , Riso , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Epilepsias Parciais/complicações , Convulsões/etiologia , EletroencefalografiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: It has been reported that 10 to 30% of patients sent to epilepsy centers with a diagnosis of refractory epilepsy are diagnosed with psychogenic non-epileptic seizure (PNES). A wide variety of provocative methods are used to assist PNES diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of seizure induction on the diagnosis and prognosis of PNES. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 91 patients with PNES complaints in our video-EEG laboratory. Intravenous saline was administered to all patients for induction of seizures. RESULTS: Saline injection was performed in 91 patients referred to our EEG lab with PNES initial diagnosis, 57 of whom were female and 34 male. Saline injection triggered an attack in 82 patients (90%). CONCLUSIONS: In this study we have concluded that provocative methods are practical, cheap and, most of all, effective for patient diagnosis. In clinical practice, explaining the diagnosis is the first and most important step of the treatment, and careful patient-doctor communication has a positive impact on patient prognosis.
Assuntos
Epilepsia , Convulsões , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Eletroencefalografia , Epilepsia/diagnóstico , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Convulsões/diagnósticoRESUMO
ABSTRACT Background: It has been reported that 10 to 30% of patients sent to epilepsy centers with a diagnosis of refractory epilepsy are diagnosed with psychogenic non-epileptic seizure (PNES). A wide variety of provocative methods are used to assist PNES diagnosis. Objective: To investigate the effect of seizure induction on the diagnosis and prognosis of PNES. Methods: We retrospectively examined 91 patients with PNES complaints in our video-EEG laboratory. Intravenous saline was administered to all patients for induction of seizures. Results: Saline injection was performed in 91 patients referred to our EEG lab with PNES initial diagnosis, 57 of whom were female and 34 male. Saline injection triggered an attack in 82 patients (90%). Conclusions: In this study we have concluded that provocative methods are practical, cheap and, most of all, effective for patient diagnosis. In clinical practice, explaining the diagnosis is the first and most important step of the treatment, and careful patient-doctor communication has a positive impact on patient prognosis.
RESUMO Antecedentes: Há relatos de que 10 a 30% dos pacientes com epilepsia refratária enviados a centros de epilepsia são diagnosticados com crise não epiléptica psicogênica (CNEP). Uma ampla variedade de métodos provocativos é usada para auxiliar no diagnóstico de CNEP. Objetivo: Investigar o efeito da indução de convulsões no diagnóstico e no prognóstico de CNEP. Métodos: Examinamos 91 pacientes com queixas de CNEP em nosso laboratório de vídeo-EEG. Foi administrada solução salina intravenosa a todos os pacientes para indução de convulsões. Resultados: A injeção de solução salina foi realizada em 91 pacientes com diagnóstico inicial de CNEP encaminhados ao nosso laboratório de EEG, 57 dos quais eram mulheres e 34 homens. A injeção de solução salina desencadeou um ataque em 82 pacientes (90%). Conclusões: Neste estudo, concluímos que os métodos provocativos são práticos, baratos e, acima de tudo, eficazes para o diagnóstico de pacientes. Na prática clínica, a explicação do diagnóstico é a primeira e mais importante etapa do tratamento, e a comunicação cuidadosa entre médicos e pacientes tem um impacto positivo em seu prognóstico.