Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Single parenchymal brain cysticercus: Relationship between age of patients and evolutive stage of parasites

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

11 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: A recent hypothesis suggested that in many cases cysticercal granulomas represent recently established Taenia solium metacestodes rapidly destroyed by the host's immune system. Here, we attempted to determine whether patients with cysticercal granulomas are younger than those with other forms of parenchymal brain cysticercosis. Methods: Series of 185 patients with single parenchymal brain cysticercus, classified according to the stage of the parasite at the moment of diagnosis in cysts without inflammation, cysts with inflammation, granular lesions, and calcifications. We correlated the age of the patients with the parasite evolutive stage. Results: Patients with cysticercus granulomas were significantly younger than those with vesicular cysts (17.7±12.9 versus 36.8±15.1 years, P<0.005) or calcifications (17.7±12.9 versus 40.8±19.7 years, P<0.0001). There was also a non-significant trend for patients with granulomas to be younger than those with coloidal cysts (17.7±12.9 versus 26.7±15.6 years, P=0.367). Conclusions: Results from this study argued against the classical hypothesis that granulomas are the end result from long-established vesicular cysts destroyed by the host's immune system. Vesicular (viable) cysticerci must be treated with cysticidal drugs as it is unlikely that they will be spontaneously destroyed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)967-970
Number of pages4
JournalNeurological Research
Volume34
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2012

Keywords

  • Cysticercal granuloma
  • Cysticercosis
  • Neurocysticercosis
  • Taenia solium metacestode

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Single parenchymal brain cysticercus: Relationship between age of patients and evolutive stage of parasites'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this