Retrospective study identifies genetic variants in pediatric complex febrile seizures, suggesting implications for early epilepsy intervention.
Background Complex febrile seizures (CFS) confer an elevated risk of epilepsy progression; however, the underlying genetic architecture remains insufficiently characterized in Chinese pediatric populations. This study aimed to delineate the mutational landscape and genotype–phenotype associations in a clinically stratified high-risk febrile seizure cohort. Methods This retrospective, single-center study enrolled 233 children (aged 6 months–6 years) who were consecutively screened at the Wuhan Children’s Hospital (July 2019–January 2025) and fulfilled ≥ 1 predefined high-risk criterion. Targeted epilepsy gene panel sequencing was performed, and variant pathogenicity was adjudicated according to ACMG/AMP guidelines. Between-group comparisons were made using the Mann–Whitney U test, Pearson’s χ 2 test with continuity correction, or Fisher’s exact test; effect sizes are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Sixty-seven patients (28.8%) harbored pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in 18 genes. Voltage-gated sodium channel genes (SCN1A, SCN1B, SCN2A, SCN8A) accounted for 44.8% of positive cases, with SCN1A being most prevalent (25.4%). Patients fulfilling ≥ 2 high-risk criteria demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield than those with a single criterion (35.4% vs. 20.8%; OR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.16–3.79; p = 0.020). P/LP-positive patients exhibited significantly elevated rates of status epilepticus (OR = 4.96), developmental delay (OR = 3.70), and abnormal interictal EEG (OR = 3.03). Among SCN1A-positive patients, 70.6% progressed to Dravet syndrome. Genetic findings modified antiseizure medication management in 62.7% of positive cases. Conclusion Targeted genetic screening in high-risk CFS populations yields a clinically significant diagnostic rate dominated by ion channel genes, facilitating early epilepsy risk identification and precise therapeutic intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Deng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: