↓ Skip to main content

Urea cycle disorder presenting as bilateral mesial temporal sclerosis – an unusual cause of seizures: a case report and review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Urea cycle disorder presenting as bilateral mesial temporal sclerosis – an unusual cause of seizures: a case report and review of the literature
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13256-018-1750-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Furene Sijia Wang, Denise Li Meng Goh, Hian Tat Ong

Abstract

Urea cycle disorders are secondary to defects in the system converting ammonia into urea, causing accumulation of ammonia and other byproducts which are neurotoxic. Ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency is the most common of the urea cycle disorders and frequently presents with coma or seizures during hyperammonemia. However, seizures can also occur without metabolic decompensation. We describe a 23-year-old Chinese woman with urea cycle disorder who presented with confusion due to focal seizures arising from the left frontotemporal region. Interestingly, her ammonia levels remained normal during the seizures. Neuroimaging showed bilateral mesial temporal sclerosis. Her seizures were successfully controlled with two anti-epileptic medications. This case adds evidence of the predisposition of the temporal lobe to injury in urea cycle disorder. Urea cycle disorder can lead to mesial temporal sclerosis which leads to increased susceptibility of patients to seizures regardless of their metabolic state.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Other 1 6%
Librarian 1 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 6 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#2,287
of 3,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,448
of 327,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#55
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,963 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,054 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.