International Journal of Advanced Medical and Health Research

: 2015  |  Volume : 2  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 146-

Acquired Dyke-Davidoff-Masson syndrome: Revisited


Correspondence Address:

How to cite this article:
. Acquired Dyke-Davidoff-Masson syndrome: Revisited .Int J Adv Med Health Res 2015;2:146-146

How to cite this URL:
. Acquired Dyke-Davidoff-Masson syndrome: Revisited . Int J Adv Med Health Res [serial online] 2015 [cited 2021 Oct 19 ];2:146-146
Available from:

Full Text


We read an interesting case report of acquired Dyke-Davidoff-Masson syndrome (DDMS) by Aneja et al. [1] The authors have very nicely described the case along with historical aspects, case reports, and case series. Here, we would like to share our experience and views:

The authors have pointed out that "most of the available literature is in the form of case reports and a few case series." The authors have quoted two series described in 2004 and 2010. Here, we would like to share the findings of our case series: [2]We studied 32 patients (21 males and 11 females) among a total of 1182 patients with epilepsy. Of these 32 patients, 28 presented with DDMS.More common presentation was congenital type.Left lateralization with hemispheric atrophy, cerebellar atrophy, calvarial thickening with frontal sinus hyper-pneumatization were significant (P < 0.05) magnetic resonance imaging findings in our patients.Other remarkable findings in our study were cerebral hemispheric and cerebellar atrophy (28.12%), hippocampal sclerosis (16%), dystonia, hemi-parkinsonism, mirror movements, and Dandy-Walker syndrome.In our series, we found 12 (37%) patients in acquired group, of course, we did not analyze the causes of acquired DDMS; hence, we cannot say how many of them were due to infections.Authors have commented on the literature that "some of the patients were reported to have refractory seizures." We, in our series, found 23 (78%) patients to be refractory seizuresOne more case series published recently by Jaiswal et al., there was poor seizure control in the acquired group in comparison to the congenital group. [3] The authors have further analyzed the causes of refractoriness. [3] In our series, the overall refractoriness was 78%, in contrast to 81% and 38% poor control in acquired and congenital groups, respectively, in this series of Jaiswal et al. [3] We have tried to compare our case series to that of Jaiswal et al. of course the themes of the series being different. [3] The aim of comparison was that if we compare the data from various regions they are useful as there are wide demographic differences in various parts of India, as are the levels of medical facilities and awareness. [4]

Financial support and sponsorship


Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.


1Aneja J, Jangli S, Singh M, Mittal A. Acquired Dyke-Davidoff-Masson syndrome (DDMS). Int J Adv Med Res 2015;2:55-8.
2Bhargava A, Bhushan B, Kasundra G, Shubhakaran K, Guruprasad SP, Basavraj B. Dyke-Davidoff-Masson syndrome: A study of clinic-radiological variability in hemiplegia, hemiatrophy and epilepsy patients. CHRISMED J Health Res 2014;1:187-93.
3Jaiswal A, Garg RK, Malhotra HS, Verma R, Singh MK. Seizures in patients with cerebral hemiatrophy: A prognostic evaluation. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2015;18:39-44.
4Shubhakaran KP, Bhushan B. Cerebral hemi-atrophy and seizures: Some facts. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2015 [In press].