Hydrogen Gas Inhalation Shows No Benefit for Infant Epilepsy Spasms

Authors
Journal
Frontiers in Neurology
Year
DOI
10.3389/fneur.2026.1781738
Study Type
Human
Outcome
Neutral
Peer Reviewed
Yes
Country
China
Health Condition
Infantile Epileptic Spasms Syndrome
Body System
Neurological

TL;DR

Hydrogen–oxygen inhalation did not improve treatment outcomes in infantile epileptic spasms but was generally tolerated, with some increases in mild adverse effects.

Key Finding

Hydrogen-oxygen gas inhalation did not improve seizure control or brain activity in children with infantile epileptic spasms syndrome compared to standard treatment alone, and was linked to higher rates of heart enzyme elevation, digestive problems, and liver function abnormalities.

Summary

Researchers tested whether breathing a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen gas could help children with infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (a serious seizure disorder) when added to their regular treatment. Over 14 days, 53 children either inhaled hydrogen-oxygen gas or regular air for one hour daily. The hydrogen-oxygen treatment did not reduce seizures or improve brain activity better than regular treatment alone, and it was associated with more cases of elevated heart enzymes, stomach problems, and liver function abnormalities.

Practical Takeaway

This controlled study in children found no clinical benefit from hydrogen-oxygen inhalation as an add-on therapy for this serious seizure disorder, and raised safety concerns about potential effects on the heart, liver, and digestive system. Anyone considering hydrogen therapies for neurological conditions should consult their doctor, as this evidence does not support its use for epileptic spasms in children.

Abstract

ObjectiveHydrogen-oxygen nebulization inhalation has a brain-protective effect. This study aims to evaluate its short-term efficacy and safety as an adjuvant treatment for infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (IESS).MethodsA prospective randomized double-blind controlled trial enrolled 53 IESS children (Nov 2021-Nov 2023), randomized via a random number table into a hydrogen-oxygen inhalation group (27 cases, 66.6% H₂/33.3% O₂ nebulization) and an air inhalation group (26 cases, medical air nebulization). Both groups received standard treatment plus 4 daily 1-h interventions for 14 consecutive days. Primary endpoints were spasticity relief and effective rates; secondary endpoints included improvements in high-amplitude abnormal EEG, IL-6 levels, respiratory tract infection rate, and adverse reactions. Statistical analyses used SPSS software.ResultsThe primary efficacy endpoints (spasm relief rate p = 0.705, effective rate p = 0.950) and secondary efficacy endpoints (disappearance rate of electroencephalogram hypsarrhythmia p = 0.576, change in Kramer score p = 0.140, change in BASED score p = 0.168, abnormal IL-6 rate p = 0.081) of the two groups of children were compared. There was no statistically significant difference. The overall incidence of adverse reactions in the two groups was comparable, and no serious adverse events occurred in either group. However, the incidences of elevated myocardial enzymes (28.3% vs. 10.9%), gastrointestinal dysfunction (43.5% vs. 23.9%), and abnormal liver function (8.7% vs. 0%) in the hydrogen-oxygen inhalation group were significantly higher than those in the air inhalation group (all p ConclusionShort-term hydrogen-oxygen nebulization inhalation failed to significantly improve the clinical efficacy of standard treatment for children with IESS. Although it is generally safe and feasible, its potential effects on myocardial, liver and gastrointestinal functions of children need to be closely monitored. In the future, large-sample, long-term follow-up multi-center studies need to be carried out to comprehensively evaluate its clinical value.Clinical trial registrationhttp://www.chictr.org.cn/bin/home, identifier (ChiCTR2100047479).