No abstract

Introduction: Drug-resistant epilepsy affects 25% of all epileptic patients, and quality of life decreases in these patients due to their seizures. Early detection is crucial in order to establish potential treatment alternatives and determine if the patient is a surgical candidate. Development: PubMed search for articles, recommendations published by major medical societies, and clinical practice guidelines for drug-resistant epilepsy and its medical and surgical treatment options. Evidence and recommendations are classified according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (2001) and the European Federation of Neurological Societies (2004) for therapeutic actions.Conclusions: Identifying patients with drug-resistant epilepsy is important for optimising drug therapy. Experts recommend rational polytherapy with antiepileptic drugs to find more effective combinations with fewer adverse effects. When adequate seizure control is not achieved, a presurgical evaluation in an epilepsy referral centre is recommended. These evaluations explore how to resect the epileptogenic zone without causing functional deficits in cases in which this is feasible. If resective surgery is not achievable, palliative surgery or neurostimulation systems (including vagus nerve, trigeminal nerve, or deep brain stimulation) may be an option. Other treatment alternatives such as ketogenic diet may also be considered in selected patients. Epilepsia resistente a fármacos. Concepto y alternativas terapéuticas ResumenIntroducción: La epilepsia resistente al tratamiento médico afecta a una cuarta parte de los pacientes con epilepsia. Como consecuencia de las crisis estos pacientes presentan una peor calidad de vida, por lo que es fundamental su diagnóstico para establecer posibles alternativas terapéuticas e iniciar una valoración prequirúrgica.Desarrollo: Búsqueda de artículos en PubMed y recomendaciones de las Guías de Práctica Clínica (GPC) y Sociedades Científicas más relevantes, referentes a epilepsia refractaria y al tratamiento médico y quirúrgico. Se clasifican las evidencias y recomendaciones según los criterios pronósticos del Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (2001) y de la European Federation of Neurological Societies (2004) para actuaciones terapéuticas.Conclusiones: La identificación de los pacientes con epilepsia refractaria es importante para optimizar el tratamiento farmacológico. Se recomienda el empleo de una politerapia racional de fármacos antiepilépticos, buscando combinaciones que aumenten la eficacia y minimicen los efectos adversos. Cuando no se consigue el control adecuado de las crisis es necesario realizar una valoración prequirúrgica en un centro especializado, con el fin de resecar la zona epileptógena sin producir déficits al paciente en los casos en los que sea posible. En caso contrario se recurrirá a procedimientos de cirugía paliativa o sistemas de neuroestimulación (vagal, trigeminal o cerebral). Otras alternativas, como la dieta cetógena, también pueden considerarse en pacientes...

Despite the introduction of new antiepileptic drugs and advances in the surgical treatment of epilepsy, an important group of patients still remains uncontrolled by any of these methods. The relatively recent introduction of vagus nerve stimulation is yet another possible treatment for refractory epilepsy. This safe, simple, and adjustable technique reduces the number of seizures and multiple publications support its increasing efficacy and effectiveness, with few adverse effects. The goal of our study is to determine the efficacy of this procedure and the factors predicting a response, particularly in the presence of a temporal lobe discharge on the video electroencephalogram (video-EEG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions. We undertook a retrospective study of all the patients with refractory epilepsy who underwent implantation of a vagus nerve stimulator between 2003 and 2009, and with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. The statistical analysis was done with SPSS for Windows. The stimulator was implanted in 40 patients, of whom 38 had a minimum follow-up of 6 months. In one patient, the device had to be removed due to infection, so the series comprised 37 patients. These were divided into different groups, according to the epidemiologic, clinical, radiologic, and electroencephalographic data. In addition, an analysis of the response was performed. The efficacy of the procedure was established according to the reduction in the mean seizure frequency. The baseline value of these seizures was 80.97 ± 143.59, falling to 37 ± 82.51 at the last revision. The response rate (reduction in seizures ≥ 50 %) at 6 months was 51.4 %, with 62.2 % of the patients showing this reduction at the last evaluation. Significant differences in the response were seen for the variables: baseline frequency of seizures, temporal lobe discharge on VideoEEG and MRI lesions. The mean time to response was 10 months in patients with lower rate of seizures versus 25 months of those with the higher rate (p = 0.024), and the response at 6 months was higher (p = 0.05). Patients with temporal lobe discharge alone or in combination with discharges over other regions had a mean time to response of 11 months versus 26 months in those without temporal discharge (p = 0.037). In the analysis of the MRI, we had seen that at the last revision, 82.4 % of the patients with lesion had achieved response versus 45 % without lesion (p = 0.02). Vagus nerve stimulation reduces the frequency of seizures. A temporal lobe discharge on the video-EEG is an indicator of an early response and the presence of an MRI lesion indicates a late response. Patients with fewer rates of seizures have a better prognosis.

No abstract

No abstract