Gary S. Gronseth

Summary of evidence-based guideline update: Evaluation and management of concussion in sports Report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Objective: To update the 1997 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) practice parameter regarding sports concussion, focusing on 4 questions: 1) What factors increase/decrease concussion risk? 2) What diagnostic tools identify those with concussion and those at increased risk for severe/prolonged early impairments, neurologic catastrophe, or chronic neurobehavioral impairment? 3) What clinical factors identify those at increased risk for severe/prolonged early postconcussion impairments, neurologic catastrophe, recurrent concussions, or chronic neurobehavioral impairment? 4) What interventions enhance recovery, reduce recurrent concussion risk, or diminish long-term sequelae? The complete guideline on which this summary is based is available as an online data supplement to this article. Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature from 1955 to June 2012 for pertinent evidence. We assessed evidence for quality and synthesized into conclusions using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. We used a modified Delphi process to develop recommendations. Results: Specific risk factors can increase or decrease concussion risk. Diagnostic tools to help identify individuals with concussion include graded symptom checklists, the Standardized Assessment of Concussion, neuropsychological assessments, and the Balance Error Scoring System. Ongoing clinical symptoms, concussion history, and younger age identify those at risk for postconcussion impairments. Risk factors for recurrent concussion include history of multiple concussions, particularly within 10 days after initial concussion. Risk factors for chronic neurobehavioral impairment include concussion exposure and APOE ε4 genotype. Data are insufficient to show that any intervention enhances recovery or diminishes long-term sequelae postconcussion. Practice recommendations are presented for preparticipation counseling, management of suspected concussion, and management of diagnosed concussion.

Assessment: Botulinum neurotoxin in the treatment of autonomic disorders and pain (an evidence-based review): report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

Objective: To perform an evidence-based review of the safety and efficacy of botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) in the treatment of autonomic and urologic disorders and low back and head pain. Methods: A literature search was performed including MEDLINE and Current Contents for therapeutic articles relevant to BoNT and the selected indications. Authors reviewed, abstracted, and classified articles based on the quality of the study (Class I–IV). Conclusions and recommendations were developed based on the highest level of evidence and put into current clinical context. Results: The highest quality literature available for the respective indications was as follows: axillary hyperhidrosis (two Class I studies); palmar hyperhidrosis (two Class II studies); drooling (four Class II studies); gustatory sweating (five Class III studies); neurogenic detrusor overactivity (two Class I studies); sphincter detrusor dyssynergia in spinal cord injury (two Class II studies); chronic low back pain (one Class II study); episodic migraine (two Class I and two Class II studies); chronic daily headache (four Class II studies); and chronic tension-type headache (two Class I studies). Recommendations: Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) should be offered as a treatment option for the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis and detrusor overactivity (Level A), should be considered for palmar hyperhidrosis, drooling, and detrusor sphincter dyssynergia after spinal cord injury (Level B), and may be considered for gustatory sweating and low back pain (Level C). BoNT is probably ineffective in episodic migraine and chronic tension-type headache (Level B). There is presently no consistent or strong evidence to permit drawing conclusions on the efficacy of BoNT in chronic daily headache (mainly transformed migraine) (Level U). While clinicians’ practice may suggest stronger recommendations in some of these indications, evidence-based conclusions are limited by the availability of data.

Distal symmetric polyneuropathy: A definition for clinical research: Report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

The objective of this report was to develop a case definition of distal symmetric polyneuropathy to standardize and facilitate clinical research and epidemiologic studies. A formalized consensus process was employed to reach agreement after a systematic review and classification of evidence from the literature. The literature indicates that symptoms alone have relatively poor diagnostic accuracy in predicting the presence of polyneuropathy; signs are better predictors of polyneuropathy than symptoms; and single abnormalities on examination are less sensitive than multiple abnormalities in predicting the presence of polyneuropathy. The combination of neuropathic symptoms, signs, and electrodiagnostic findings provides the most accurate diagnosis of distal symmetric polyneuropathy. A set of case definitions was rank ordered by likelihood of disease. The highest likelihood of polyneuropathy (useful for clinical trials) occurs with a combination of multiple symptoms, multiple signs, and abnormal electrodiagnostic studies. A modest likelihood of polyneuropathy (useful for field or epidemiologic studies) occurs with a combination of multiple symptoms and multiple signs when the results of electrodiagnostic studies are not available. A lower likelihood of polyneuropathy occurs when electrodiagnostic studies and signs are discordant. For research purposes, the best approach to defining distal symmetric polyneuropathy is a set of case definitions rank ordered by estimated likelihood of disease. The inclusion of this formalized case definition in clinical and epidemiologic research studies will ensure greater consistency of case selection.

Evidence-based guideline update: Determining brain death in adults Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Objective: To provide an update of the 1995 American Academy of Neurology guideline with regard to the following questions: Are there patients who fulfill the clinical criteria of brain death who recover neurologic function? What is an adequate observation period to ensure that cessation of neurologic function is permanent? Are complex motor movements that falsely suggest retained brain function sometimes observed in brain death? What is the comparative safety of techniques for determining apnea? Are there new ancillary tests that accurately identify patients with brain death? Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted and included a review of MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1996 to May 2009. Studies were limited to adults. Results and recommendations: In adults, there are no published reports of recovery of neurologic function after a diagnosis of brain death using the criteria reviewed in the 1995 American Academy of Neurology practice parameter. Complex-spontaneous motor movements and false-positive triggering of the ventilator may occur in patients who are brain dead. There is insufficient evidence to determine the minimally acceptable observation period to ensure that neurologic functions have ceased irreversibly. Apneic oxygenation diffusion to determine apnea is safe, but there is insufficient evidence to determine the comparative safety of techniques used for apnea testing. There is insufficient evidence to determine if newer ancillary tests accurately confirm the cessation of function of the entire brain.

Practice parameter: Thymectomy for autoimmune myasthenia gravis (an evidence-based review) Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

The Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology is charged with developing practice parameters for neurologists for diagnostic procedures, treatment modalities, and clinical disorders. The selection of topics for which practice parameters are used is based on prevalence, frequency of use, economic impact, membership involvement, controversy, urgency, external constraints, and resources required. This paper addresses the role of thymectomy in the treatment of nonthymomatous autoimmune MG. In 1939, Blalock et al.1 reported the remission of generalized MG in a 21-year-old woman after removal of a cystic thymic tumor. Subsequently, Blalock et al.2,3 performed thymectomy on MG patients without thymoma, found hyperplasia in the thymus glands, and reported improvement in at least half of their patients. Since these reports, thymectomy, with or without the presence of thymoma, has gained widespread acceptance as a form of treatment for MG. Because a definitive study of the effectiveness of thymectomy has never been done,4,5 the role of thymectomy in the management of MG remains uncertain. Nevertheless, physicians have to advise their patients regarding the benefits of thymectomy based on the existing literature. Our goal is to develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians considering thymectomy for patients with nonthymomatous autoimmune MG by performing a systematic review and analysis of the literature. ### Identification and selection of studies. We searched the National Library of Medicine’s Medline database from 1966 to February 1998 using the medical subject headings “myasthenia gravis” (restricted to the surgery subheading) and “thymectomy.” To identify articles published before 1966, or missed by our original search strategy, we reviewed the references of the identified articles. We classified the resulting articles into the following categories: Class II, controlled but nonrandomized studies describing outcomes in MG patients with and without thymectomy; and Class III, uncontrolled case series describing outcomes in patients with or without …

Practice Parameter: The diagnostic evaluation and treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (an evidence-based review): Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the European Federation of Neurological Societies

Background: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a common cause of facial pain. Purpose: To answer the following questions: 1) In patients with TN, how often does routine neuroimaging (CT, MRI) identify a cause? 2) Which features identify patients at increased risk for symptomatic TN (STN; i.e., a structural cause such as a tumor)? 3) Does high-resolution MRI accurately identify patients with neurovascular compression? 4) Which drugs effectively treat classic and symptomatic trigeminal neuralgia? 5) When should surgery be offered? 6) Which surgical technique gives the longest pain-free period with the fewest complications and good quality of life? Methods: Systematic review of the literature by a panel of experts. Conclusions: In patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN), routine head imaging identifies structural causes in up to 15% of patients and may be considered useful (Level C). Trigeminal sensory deficits, bilateral involvement of the trigeminal nerve, and abnormal trigeminal reflexes are associated with an increased risk of symptomatic TN (STN) and should be considered useful in distinguishing STN from classic trigeminal neuralgia (Level B). There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the usefulness of MRI to identify neurovascular compression of the trigeminal nerve (Level U). Carbamazepine (Level A) or oxcarbazepine (Level B) should be offered for pain control while baclofen and lamotrigine (Level C) may be considered useful. For patients with TN refractory to medical therapy, Gasserian ganglion percutaneous techniques, gamma knife, and microvascular decompression may be considered (Level C). The role of surgery vs pharmacotherapy in the management of TN in patients with MS remains uncertain.

Practice parameter: recurrent stroke with patent foramen ovale and atrial septal aneurysm: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

Objectives: 1) To evaluate the risk of subsequent stroke or death in patients with a cryptogenic stroke and a patent foramen ovale (PFO), atrial septal aneurysm (ASA), or both. 2) To establish the optimal method of stroke prevention in this population of patients. Methods: MEDLINE, the Cochrane database of systematic reviews, key meeting abstracts from 1997 to 2002, and relevant reference lists were searched to select studies that prospectively collected outcome data in cryptogenic stroke patients with and without interatrial septal abnormalities. Studies were also selected that prospectively compared at least two treatment options. The quality of each study was graded (class I to IV) using a standard classification-of-evidence scheme for each question. Risk analyses were performed and data were pooled when appropriate. Results: The literature search generated 129 articles of which only four fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two studies were graded class I, one study was graded class II, and one study was graded class IV for prognosis. Pooled results of the two class I and one class II studies demonstrated no increased risk of subsequent stroke or death in patients with PFO compared to those without (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.44). One class I study found increased risk of recurrent stroke in patients with PFO and ASA (annual rate = 3.8% versus 1.05%, RR = 2.98, 95% CI 1.17 to 7.58) but not increased risk of a composite of stroke and death (annual rate = 3.8% versus 1.8%, RR = 2.10, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.06). Regarding therapy, one study was graded class II, one study class III, and two studies class IV. Among patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO or ASA, there was no significant difference in stroke or death rate in warfarin-treated patients relative to aspirin-treated patients and the confidence intervals were unable to rule out a benefit of one drug over the other (annual rate = 4.7% versus 8.9%, RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.58). Minor bleeding rates were higher in the cohort of patients who received warfarin (22.9/100 patient-years versus 8.66/100 patient-years, rate ratio = 2.64, p < 0.001). No studies compared medical therapy with surgical or endovascular closure. Conclusion: PFO is not associated with increased risk of subsequent stroke or death among medically treated patients with cryptogenic stroke. However, both PFO and ASA possibly increase the risk of subsequent stroke (but not death) in medically treated patients younger than 55 years. In patients with a cryptogenic stroke and an atrial septal abnormality the evidence is insufficient to determine if warfarin or aspirin is superior in preventing recurrent stroke or death, but minor bleeding is more frequent with warfarin. There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the efficacy of surgical or endovascular closure.Objectives1) To evaluate the risk of subsequent stroke or death in patients with a cryptogenic stroke and a patent foramen ovale (PFO), atrial septal aneurysm (ASA), or both. 2) To establish the optimal method of stroke prevention in this population of patients. MethodsMEDLINE, the Cochrane database of systematic reviews, key meeting abstracts from 1997 to 2002, and relevant reference lists were searched to select studies that prospectively collected outcome data in cryptogenic stroke patients with and without interatrial septal abnormalities. Studies were also selected that prospectively compared at least two treatment options. The quality of each study was graded (class I to IV) using a standard classification-of-evidence scheme for each question. Risk analyses were performed and data were pooled when appropriate. ResultsThe literature search generated 129 articles of which only four fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two studies were graded class I, one study was graded class II, and one study was graded class IV for prognosis. Pooled results of the two class I and one class II studies demonstrated no increased risk of subsequent stroke or death in patients with PFO compared to those without (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.44). One class I study found increased risk of recurrent stroke in patients with PFO and ASA (annual rate = 3.8% versus 1.05%, RR = 2.98, 95% CI 1.17 to 7.58) but not increased risk of a composite of stroke and death (annual rate = 3.8% versus 1.8%, RR = 2.10, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.06). Regarding therapy, one study was graded class II, one study class III, and two studies class IV. Among patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO or ASA, there was no significant difference in stroke or death rate in warfarin-treated patients relative to aspirin-treated patients and the confidence intervals were unable to rule out a benefit of one drug over the other (annual rate = 4.7% versus 8.9%, RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.58). Minor bleeding rates were higher in the cohort of patients who received warfarin (22.9/100 patient-years versus 8.66/100 patient-years, rate ratio = 2.64, p < 0.001). No studies compared medical therapy with surgical or endovascular closure. ConclusionPFO is not associated with increased risk of subsequent stroke or death among medically treated patients with cryptogenic stroke. However, both PFO and ASA possibly increase the risk of subsequent stroke (but not death) in medically treated patients younger than 55 years. In patients with a cryptogenic stroke and an atrial septal abnormality the evidence is insufficient to determine if warfarin or aspirin is superior in preventing recurrent stroke or death, but minor bleeding is more frequent with warfarin. There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the efficacy of surgical or endovascular closure.

Practice Parameter update: Management issues for women with epilepsy—Focus on pregnancy (an evidence-based review): Teratogenesis and perinatal outcomes Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee and Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and American Epilepsy Society

Objective: To reassess the evidence for management issues related to the care of women with epilepsy (WWE) during pregnancy. Methods: Systematic review of relevant articles published between January 1985 and June 2007. Results: It is highly probable that intrauterine first-trimester valproate (VPA) exposure has higher risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs) compared to carbamazepine and possible compared to phenytoin or lamotrigine. Compared to untreated WWE, it is probable that VPA as part of polytherapy and possible that VPA as monotherapy contribute to the development of MCMs. It is probable that antiepileptic drug (AED) polytherapy as compared to monotherapy regimens contributes to the development of MCMs and to reduced cognitive outcomes. For monotherapy, intrauterine exposure to VPA probably reduces cognitive outcomes. Further, monotherapy exposure to phenytoin or phenobarbital possibly reduces cognitive outcomes. Neonates of WWE taking AEDs probably have an increased risk of being small for gestational age and possibly have an increased risk of a 1-minute Apgar score of <7. Recommendations: If possible, avoidance of valproate (VPA) and antiepileptic drug (AED) polytherapy during the first trimester of pregnancy should be considered to decrease the risk of major congenital malformations (Level B). If possible, avoidance of VPA and AED polytherapy throughout pregnancy should be considered to prevent reduced cognitive outcomes (Level B). If possible, avoidance of phenytoin and phenobarbital during pregnancy may be considered to prevent reduced cognitive outcomes (Level C). Pregnancy risk stratification should reflect that the offspring of women with epilepsy taking AEDs are probably at increased risk for being small for gestational age (Level B) and possibly at increased risk of 1-minute Apgar scores of <7 (Level C).

Practice Parameter: Therapies for essential tremor Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Background: Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common tremor disorders in adults and is characterized by kinetic and postural tremor. To develop this practice parameter, the authors reviewed available evidence regarding initiation of pharmacologic and surgical therapies, duration of their effect, their relative benefits and risks, and the strength of evidence supporting their use. Methods: A literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and CINAHL was performed to identify clinical trials in patients with ET published between 1966 and August 2004. Articles were classified according to a four-tiered level of evidence scheme and recommendations were based on the level of evidence. Results and Conclusions: Propranolol and primidone reduce limb tremor (Level A). Alprazolam, atenolol, gabapentin (monotherapy), sotalol, and topiramate are probably effective in reducing limb tremor (Level B). Limited studies suggest that propranolol reduces head tremor (Level B). Clonazepam, clozapine, nadolol, and nimodipine possibly reduce limb tremor (Level C). Botulinum toxin A may reduce hand tremor but is associated with dose-dependent hand weakness (Level C). Botulinum toxin A may reduce head tremor (Level C) and voice tremor (Level C), but breathiness, hoarseness, and swallowing difficulties may occur in the treatment of voice tremor. Chronic deep brain stimulation (DBS) (Level C) and thalamotomy (Level C) are highly efficacious in reducing tremor. Each procedure carries a small risk of major complications. Some adverse events from DBS may resolve with time or with adjustment of stimulator settings. There is insufficient evidence regarding the surgical treatment of head and voice tremor and the use of gamma knife thalamotomy (Level U). Additional prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials are needed to better determine the efficacy and side effects of pharmacologic and surgical treatments of ET.

Systematic review: Efficacy and safety of medical marijuana in selected neurologic disorders: Report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Objective: To determine the efficacy of medical marijuana in several neurologic conditions. Methods: We performed a systematic review of medical marijuana (1948–November 2013) to address treatment of symptoms of multiple sclerosis (MS), epilepsy, and movement disorders. We graded the studies according to the American Academy of Neurology classification scheme for therapeutic articles. Results: Thirty-four studies met inclusion criteria; 8 were rated as Class I. Conclusions: The following were studied in patients with MS: (1) Spasticity: oral cannabis extract (OCE) is effective, and nabiximols and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are probably effective, for reducing patient-centered measures; it is possible both OCE and THC are effective for reducing both patient-centered and objective measures at 1 year. (2) Central pain or painful spasms (including spasticity-related pain, excluding neuropathic pain): OCE is effective; THC and nabiximols are probably effective. (3) Urinary dysfunction: nabiximols is probably effective for reducing bladder voids/day; THC and OCE are probably ineffective for reducing bladder complaints. (4) Tremor: THC and OCE are probably ineffective; nabiximols is possibly ineffective. (5) Other neurologic conditions: OCE is probably ineffective for treating levodopa-induced dyskinesias in patients with Parkinson disease. Oral cannabinoids are of unknown efficacy in non–chorea-related symptoms of Huntington disease, Tourette syndrome, cervical dystonia, and epilepsy. The risks and benefits of medical marijuana should be weighed carefully. Risk of serious adverse psychopathologic effects was nearly 1%. Comparative effectiveness of medical marijuana vs other therapies is unknown for these indications.