Background By definition, the background EEG is normal in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME) patients and not accompanied by other developmental and cognitive problems. However, some recent studies using quantitative EEG (qEEG) reported abnormal changes in the background activity. QEEG investigation in patients undergoing anticonvulsant treatment might be a useful approach to explore the electrophysiology and anticonvulsant effects in JME. Methods We investigated background EEG activity changes in patients undergoing valproic acid (VPA) treatment using qEEG analysis in a distributed source model. In 17 children with JME, non-parametric statistical analysis using standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography was performed to compare the current density distribution of four frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha, and beta) between untreated and treated conditions. Results VPA reduced background EEG activity in the low-frequency (delta-theta) bands across the frontal, parieto-occipital, and limbic lobes (threshold log-F-ratio = ±1.414, p < 0.05; threshold log-F-ratio= ±1.465, p < 0.01). In the delta band, comparative analysis revealed significant current density differences in the occipital, parietal, and limbic lobes. In the theta band, the analysis revealed significant differences in the frontal, occipital, and limbic lobes. The maximal difference was found in the delta band in the cuneus of the left occipital lobe (log-F-ratio = −1.840) and the theta band in the medial frontal gyrus of the left frontal lobe (log-F-ratio = −1.610). Conclusions This study demonstrated the anticonvulsant effects on the neural networks involved in JME. In addition, these findings suggested the focal features and the possibility of functional deficits in patients with JME.

Epileptic encephalopathy (EE) is a devastating pediatric disease that features medically resistant seizures, which can contribute to global developmental delays. Despite technological advancements in genetics, the neurobiological mechanisms of EEs are not fully understood, leaving few therapeutic options for affected patients. In this review, we introduce the most common EEs in pediatrics (i.e., Ohtahara syndrome, Dravet syndrome, and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome) and their molecular mechanisms that cause excitation/inhibition imbalances. We then discuss some of the essential molecules that are frequently dysregulated in EEs. Specifically, we explore voltage-gated ion channels, synaptic transmission-related proteins, and ligand-gated ion channels in association with the pathophysiology of Ohtahara syndrome, Dravet syndrome, and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Finally, we review currently available antiepileptic drugs used to treat seizures in patients with EEs. Since these patients often fail to achieve seizure relief even with the combination therapy, further extensive research efforts to explore the involved molecular mechanisms will be required to develop new drugs for patients with intractable epilepsy.

No abstract

Neurodiagnostic investigation requirements are expanding for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in children, especially in those with developmental delay/intellectual disability (DD/ID). Thus, determination of optimal sedatives to achieve successful sedation and immobility without further neurological compromise is important in children with DD/ID. The purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness and adverse reactions of chloral hydrate (CH) for brain magnetic resonance imaging (B-MRI) in children with DD/ID compared to those with normal intelligence (NI). We performed a retrospective chart review of children aged from 1 day to 12 years who required elective sedation using CH for B-MRI. About 730 cases (415 with DD/ID and 315 with NI) of CH sedation were conducted for B-MRI. Children with DD/ID showed a higher failure rate (22%) than did those with NI (6%); additional CH and prolonged sedation time were required. There was no difference in incidence of adverse reactions between DD/ID and NI groups (p = 0.338). Older or heavier children with DD/ID (p = 0.036 and p = 0.013, respectively), as well as those diagnosed with epilepsy or neuropsychiatric disorders showed higher risk of sedation failure (p < 0.001 for each). In conclusion, CH was a suboptimal sedative drug for children with DD/ID compared with those with NI. Other alternative or supplementary sedatives should be taken into consideration especially for those vulnerable groups.