Bilateral Ocular Neuromyotonia and Epilepsy -Two Neurological Complications in One Patient with Systemic Connective Tissue Disease
Andrija Kostic1, Milica Pantic2, Nikola Savic3
1Clinic of neurology, KBC “Dr Dragiša Mišović Dedinje”, Belgrade, Serbia
2Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia
3Department of Health Studies, Singidunum University, Faculty of Health and Business Studies, Valjevo, Serbia
*Corresponding author
Andrija Kostic, Clinic of neurology, KBC “Dr Dragiša Mišović Dedinje”, Belgrade, Serbia
DOI: 10.55920/JCRMHS.2025.10.001452
Figure 1:
a) looking straight (normal)
b) forced look to the right which leads to neuromyotonic reaction (c and d).
c) looking straight, right bulb is in convergence and after 15 seconds the right bulb returns to its normal position. But when she looks to the left (d), the left bulb remains in the primary position.
d) looks to the left
Figure 2: MRI T2 axial: one unspecific punctiform lesion, left frontal subcortical.
The membrane stabilizer carbamazepine was introduced into the therapy, according to available data in the literature. The initial dose was 2 x 200mg. Since no myoclonic and apsence seizures have been observed before, we did not expect deterioration of seizure control. The neurological findings registered a reduction but not resolution of myotonic phenomena on the eye muscles, so carbamazepine was increased to 2x400mg.
The patient was discharged with therapy: levetiracem in a daily dose of 2x1000mg, carbamazepine in a daily dose of 2x400mg, with previous internist therapy. At the last check-up, complete resolution of the ocular symptoms was observed. During that period and onwards she was seizures free. A visit to a rheumatologist and immunosuppressive therapy escalation was suggested, but we did not receive that report until the writing of this review. In a telephone conversation, the patient told us that since she was discharged from our clinic she has not had any ocular symptoms or seizures, and that the rheumatologist did not correct the therapy because she does not meet the criteria according to the health insurance regulations.
Differential diagnosis: We considered early stage of Graves disease (thyroid hormones were normal), convergence spasm and conversion disorder (previous psychiatric report), Superior oblique myokymia (monocular, rhythmic contraction). The Heimann Beilshowsky phenomenon (HBF) is an interesting differential diagnosis. Namely, this phenomenon is characterized by monocular peduncular oscillatory activity, but which is a consequence of ipsilateral vision loss that persists for a longer period of time. It becomes more apparent with distance fixation and is inhibited by convergence or near fixation. In contrast, ONM is characterized by repetitive short episodes of diplopia secondary to unilateral involuntary spasms of one or more extraocular muscles innervated by one of the cranial nerves (n.oculomotorius, less often n.trochlearis and n.abducens).
However, what HBF and ocular neuromyotonia have in common is the main pathophysiological mechanism, that is, ephaptic (lateral) transmission, which is believed to underlie both diseases [11]. Ephaptic neural transmission is also the mechanism by which hemifacial spasm occur [12]. It’s also important to distinguish it from conversion disorder. Namely, conversion disorder is characterized by the manifestation of inexplicable physical symptoms that affect voluntary motor and sensory function in such a way that they indicate the existence of a neurological disease with an emphasis on the presence of intrapsychic conflicts that play a significant role in the initial onset of symptoms, exacerbation and maintenance over time. However, in the case of conversion disorder, careful observation and repeated clinical exams can reveal an atypical clinical presentation that does not correspond to a disease of the nervous system per se [13].


