No abstract

Background: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) therapy has been widely recognized as an alternative for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy, although modification of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) during VNS treatment could explain the improvement in patients. Methods: We retrospectively assessed the efficacy of VNS in 30 adult patients with epilepsy treated with >6 months of follow-up. The criteria for implantation were the following: (1) not a candidate for resective epilepsy surgery, (2) drug-resistant epilepsy, (3) impairment of quality of life, (4) no other option of treatment, and (5) patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy who fail to be controlled with appropriate AEDs. We assessed sociodemographics, seizure etiology, seizure classification, and AEDs used during treatment with VNS. We assessed adverse effects and efficacy. Responder rate was defined as >50% seizure improvement from baseline. Results: Thirty patients (females, 18; males, 12; age, 35.1 ± 13.3 years) were included. After 6, 12, 24, and 36 months of followup, the response rates were: 13/30 (43%), 13/27 (48%), 9/22 (41%), and 8/16 (50%), respectively; none was seizure free. Fifty-seven percent, 33%, 59%, and 81% of patients had changes of medication type or dose at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months respectively. In the majority of patients, the change of medication consisted of an increase in the dose of AEDs. Conclusions: Our study shows that VNS is an effective therapy, although significant changes in medications were done along with the therapy; therefore, the real effect of VNS could be controversial.RÉSUMÉ: Efficacité de la stimulation du nerf vague pour traiter l'épilepsie réfractaire. Contexte : La stimulation du nerf vague (SNV) est une alternative au traitement bien établi dans le traitement de l'épilepsie réfractaire, quoique la modification de la médication antiépileptique (MAE) pendant le traitement par SNV puisse expliquer l'amélioration constatée chez les patients. Méthodologie : Nous avons évalué rétrospectivement l'efficacité de la SNV chez 30 adultes atteints d'épilepsie traités par SNV et suivis pendant plus de 6 mois. Les critères pour l'implantation étaient les suivants : (1) ne pas être un candidat à la résection chirurgicale ; (2) être atteint d'une épilepsie réfractaire au traitement ; (3) présenter une altération de la qualité de vie ; (4) n'avoir aucune autre option de traitement et (5) être atteint d'épilepsie généralisée idiopathique qui n'est pas contrôlée par une MAE appropriée. Nous avons évalué les caractéristiques sociodémographiques, l'étiologie des crises, la classification des crises et la MAE utilisée pendant le traitement par la SNV. Nous en avons évalué les effets indésirables et l'efficacité. Le statut de répondeur a été défini comme étant un patient présentant une amélioration de plus de 50% des crises par rapport à la période précédant la SNV. Résultats : Trente patients (18 femmes et 12 hommes dont l'âge moyen était de 35,1 ± 13,3 ans) ont été inclus dans l'étude. Après un suivi de 6, 12, 24 et 36 ...

Background: Less than one-third of people with epilepsy will develop drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Establishing the prognosis of each unique epilepsy case is an important part of evaluation and treatment.Most studies on DRE prognosis have been based on a pooled, heterogeneous group, including children, adults, and older adults, in the absence of clear recognition and control of important confounders, such as age group. Furthermore, previous studies were done before the 2010 definition of DRE by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE), so data based on the current definitions have not been entirely elucidated. This study aimed to explore the difference between 3 definitions of DRE and clinical predictors of DRE in adults and older adults.Methods: Patients with a new diagnosis of epilepsy ascertained at a Single Seizure Clinic (SSC) in Saskatchewan, Canada were included if they had at least 1 year of follow-up. The first study outcome was the diagnosis of DRE epilepsy at follow-up using the 2010 ILAE definition. This was compared with 2 alternative definitions of DRE by Kwan and Brodie and Camfield and Camfield. Finally, risk factors were analyzed using the ILAE definition.Results: In total, 95 patients with a new diagnosis of epilepsy and a median follow-up of 24 months were included. The median age of patients at the diagnosis of epilepsy was 33 years, and 51% were men. In the cohort, 32% of patients were diagnosed with DRE by the Kwan and Brodie definition, 10% by Camfield and Camfield definition, and 15% by the ILAE definition by the end of follow-up. The only statistically significant risk factor for DRE development was the failure to respond to the first anti-seizure medication (ASM).Conclusion: There were important differences in the percentage of patients diagnosed with DRE when using 3 concurrent definitions. However, the use of the ILAE definition appeared to be the most consistent through an extended follow-up. Finally, failure to respond to the first ASM was the sole significant risk factor for DRE in the cohort after considering the age group.

Background and ObjectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the ambulatory EEG (aEEG) at detecting interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs)/seizures compared with routine EEG (rEEG) and repetitive/second rEEG in patients with a first single unprovoked seizure (FSUS). We also evaluated the association between IED/seizures on aEEG and seizure recurrence within 1 year of follow-up.MethodsWe prospectively evaluated 100 consecutive patients with FSUS at the provincial Single Seizure Clinic. They underwent 3 sequential EEG modalities: first rEEG, second rEEG, and aEEG. Clinical epilepsy diagnosis was ascertained based on the 2014 International League Against Epilepsy definition by a neurologist/epileptologist at the clinic. An EEG-certified epileptologist/neurologist interpreted all 3 EEGs. All patients were followed up for 52 weeks until they had either second unprovoked seizure or maintained single seizure status. Accuracy measures (sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values, and likelihood ratios), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of each EEG modality. Life tables and the Cox proportional hazard model were used to estimate the probability and association of seizure recurrence.ResultsAmbulatory EEG captured IED/seizures with a sensitivity of 72%, compared with 11% for the first rEEG and 22% for the second rEEG. The diagnostic performance of the aEEG was statistically better (AUC: 0.85) compared with the first rEEG (AUC: 0.56) and second rEEG (AUC: 0.60). There were no statistically significant differences between the 3 EEG modalities regarding specificity and positive predictive value. Finally, IED/seizure on the aEEG was associated with more than 3 times the hazard of seizure recurrence.DiscussionThe overall diagnostic accuracy of aEEG at capturing IED/seizures in people presenting with FSUS was higher than the first and second rEEGs. We also found that IED/seizures on the aEEG were associated with an increased risk of seizure recurrence.Classification of EvidenceThis study provides Class I evidence supporting that, in adults with First Single Unprovoked Seizure (FSUS), 24-h ambulatory EEG has increased sensitivity when compared with routine and repeated EEG.