The clinical, electroencephalographic and Imaging diagnostic features of the 45 @entity1 of Localization-related @entity302 who had @entity227 at @entity410 onset were investigated. There were 24 males and 21 females aged 19 to 78. Their ages at @entity410 onset ranged from 1 to 55 with a mean of 15.4. The @entity1 were divided into 3 groups based on the pattern of @entity227 : Group 1; 23 @entity1 (51%) with only elementary positive visual symptoms, Group 2; 9 @entity1 (20%) with only elementary negative visual symptoms, Group 3; 13 @entity1 (29%) with others. It came to our notice that 8 (18%) @entity1 in Group 3 had positive + negative (P*N) @entity410 such as scintillation @entity1019 . It was quite difficult to draw a distinction between the P*N @entity410 and scintillation @entity1019 in @entity2704 @entity1 in quality. Therefore, a question arises whether similarities between them are ascribed to the same underlying mechanism. It is possible that the mechanism of the P*N @entity410 is different from that of the scintillation @entity1019 , but the both produce the same condition. However, we are not competent to discuss this hypothesis. Further work along this line is necessary. In addition to the @entity227 , autonomic (69%), focal motor (29%), illusion (29%), @entity410 (22%) manifestations, etc. were also observed. These manifestations suggest that @entity302 ictal discharges spread into many different brain areas. Regarding Group 1-3, occurrence of illusional @entity410 was more common in Group 2. In this group, in only one @entity1 , occipital interictal discharges were observed. The subjects were subclassified into two groups depending on whether the @entity410 were well controlled (good outcome) or poorly controlled (poor outcome group). On these groups, comparative studies were performed. The poportion of the @entity1 with a family history of @entity410 was higher in the latter than that in the former. To the contrary, the poportion of the @entity1 with a etiologic episode was higher in the former than that in the latter. With respect to the imaging study, regardless of localizations, abnormal findings were detected in 25% on CT scan, in 29% on MRI, and in 71% on SPECT. Whether or not these abnormal findings completely or partially agreed with presumed epileptogenic brain region (occipital lobes) was investigated. CT scan was positive (correspondent) in 8%, MRI was positive in 13%, and SPECT was positive in 54%. The incidence of SPECT abnormalities was higher in the poor outcome group (70 %) than that in the good outcome one (43%). We may, therefore, conclude that SPECT seems to be useful for the detection of epileptogenic region, especially in intractable cases. But the incidence of these imaging studies' abnormalities located in occipital lobe was not so high, therefore, there seems to be no doubt that clinical symptoms and EEG findings are most important for diagnosis.

[Clinical examination on localization-related @entity302 with XXXX --clinical, electroencephalographic and imaging diagnostic studies].

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'patient'] @entity227 :: ('MESH:D014786', 'Disease') :: ['elementary visual symptoms'] @entity410 :: ('MESH:D012640', 'Disease') :: ['seizure', 'seizures', 'convulsive disorder', 'vertiginous', 'visual seizures'] @entity2704 :: ('MESH:D008881', 'Disease') :: ['migrainous'] @entity302 :: ('MESH:D004827', 'Disease') :: ['epileptic', 'Epilepsy'] @entity1019 :: ('MESH:D012607', 'Disease') :: ['scotoma']
@entity410 :: (MESH:D012640,Disease) :: ['elementary visual seizures']
