Samuel Wiebe

Definition of drug resistant epilepsy: consensus proposal by the ad hoc Task Force of the ILAE Commission on Therapeutic Strategies.

To improve patient care and facilitate clinical research, the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) appointed a Task Force to formulate a consensus definition of drug resistant epilepsy. The overall framework of the definition has two “hierarchical” levels: Level 1 provides a general scheme to categorize response to each therapeutic intervention, including a minimum dataset of knowledge about the intervention that would be needed; Level 2 provides a core definition of drug resistant epilepsy using a set of essential criteria based on the categorization of response (from Level 1) to trials of antiepileptic drugs. It is proposed as a testable hypothesis that drug resistant epilepsy is defined as failure of adequate trials of two tolerated, appropriately chosen and used antiepileptic drug schedules (whether as monotherapies or in combination) to achieve sustained seizure freedom. This definition can be further refined when new evidence emerges. The rationale behind the definition and the principles governing its proper use are discussed, and examples to illustrate its application in clinical practice are provided.

ILAE Official Report: A practical clinical definition of epilepsy

Epilepsy was defined conceptually in 2005 as a disorder of the brain characterized by an enduring predisposition to generate epileptic seizures. This definition is usually practically applied as having two unprovoked seizures >24 h apart. The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) accepted recommendations of a task force altering the practical definition for special circumstances that do not meet the two unprovoked seizures criteria. The task force proposed that epilepsy be considered to be a disease of the brain defined by any of the following conditions: (1) At least two unprovoked (or reflex) seizures occurring >24 h apart; (2) one unprovoked (or reflex) seizure and a probability of further seizures similar to the general recurrence risk (at least 60%) after two unprovoked seizures, occurring over the next 10 years; (3) diagnosis of an epilepsy syndrome. Epilepsy is considered to be resolved for individuals who either had an age‐dependent epilepsy syndrome but are now past the applicable age or who have remained seizure‐free for the last 10 years and off antiseizure medicines for at least the last 5 years. “Resolved” is not necessarily identical to the conventional view of “remission or “cure.” Different practical definitions may be formed and used for various specific purposes. This revised definition of epilepsy brings the term in concordance with common use.

Practice parameter: Temporal lobe and localized neocortical resections for epilepsy Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology, in Association with the American Epilepsy Society and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons

Objectives/Methods: To examine evidence for effectiveness of anteromesial temporal lobe and localized neocortical resections for disabling complex partial seizures by systematic review and analysis of the literature since 1990. Results: One intention-to-treat Class I randomized, controlled trial of surgery for mesial temporal lobe epilepsy found that 58% of patients randomized to be evaluated for surgical therapy (64% of those who received surgery) were free of disabling seizures and 10 to 15% were unimproved at the end of 1 year, compared with 8% free of disabling seizures in the group randomized to continued medical therapy. There was a significant improvement in quantitative quality-of-life scores and a trend toward better social function at the end of 1 year for patients in the surgical group, no surgical mortality, and infrequent morbidity. Twenty-four Class IV series of temporal lobe resections yielded essentially identical results. There are similar Class IV results for localized neocortical resections; no Class I or II studies are available. Conclusions: A single Class I study and 24 Class IV studies indicate that the benefits of anteromesial temporal lobe resection for disabling complex partial seizures is greater than continued treatment with antiepileptic drugs, and the risks are at least comparable. For patients who are compromised by such seizures, referral to an epilepsy surgery center should be strongly considered. Further studies are needed to determine if neocortical seizures benefit from surgery, and whether early surgical intervention should be the treatment of choice for certain surgically remediable epileptic syndromes.

Psychiatric Comorbidity in Epilepsy: A Population-Based Analysis

Purpose: The estimated prevalence of mental health disorders in those with epilepsy in the general population varies owing to differences in study methods and heterogeneity of epilepsy syndromes. We assessed the population‐based prevalence of various psychiatric conditions associated with epilepsy using a large Canadian national population health survey.

Standards for epidemiologic studies and surveillance of epilepsy

Worldwide, about 65 million people are estimated to have epilepsy. Epidemiologic studies are necessary to define the full public health burden of epilepsy; to set public health and health care priorities; to provide information needed for prevention, early detection, and treatment; to identify education and service needs; and to promote effective health care and support programs for people with epilepsy. However, different definitions and epidemiologic methods complicate the tasks of these studies and their interpretations and comparisons. The purpose of this document is to promote consistency in definitions and methods in an effort to enhance future population‐based epidemiologic studies, facilitate comparison between populations, and encourage the collection of data useful for the promotion of public health. We discuss: (1) conceptual and operational definitions of epilepsy, (2) data resources and recommended data elements, and (3) methods and analyses appropriate for epidemiologic studies or the surveillance of epilepsy. Variations in these are considered, taking into account differing resource availability and needs among countries and differing purposes among studies.

International consensus classification of hippocampal sclerosis in temporal lobe epilepsy: A Task Force report from the ILAE Commission on Diagnostic Methods

Hippocampal sclerosis (HS) is the most frequent histopathology encountered in patients with drug‐resistant temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). Over the past decades, various attempts have been made to classify specific patterns of hippocampal neuronal cell loss and correlate subtypes with postsurgical outcome. However, no international consensus about definitions and terminology has been achieved. A task force reviewed previous classification schemes and proposes a system based on semiquantitative hippocampal cell loss patterns that can be applied in any histopathology laboratory. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement studies reached consensus to classify three types in anatomically well‐preserved hippocampal specimens: HS International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) type 1 refers always to severe neuronal cell loss and gliosis predominantly in CA1 and CA4 regions, compared to CA1 predominant neuronal cell loss and gliosis (HS ILAE type 2), or CA4 predominant neuronal cell loss and gliosis (HS ILAE type 3). Surgical hippocampus specimens obtained from patients with TLE may also show normal content of neurons with reactive gliosis only (no‐HS). HS ILAE type 1 is more often associated with a history of initial precipitating injuries before age 5 years, with early seizure onset, and favorable postsurgical seizure control. CA1 predominant HS ILAE type 2 and CA4 predominant HS ILAE type 3 have been studied less systematically so far, but some reports point to less favorable outcome, and to differences regarding epilepsy history, including age of seizure onset. The proposed international consensus classification will aid in the characterization of specific clinicopathologic syndromes, and explore variability in imaging and electrophysiology findings, and in postsurgical seizure control.

Practice Parameter: Temporal Lobe and Localized Neocortical Resections for Epilepsy

Summary:  Purpose: To examine evidence for effectiveness of anteromesial temporal lobe and localized neocortical resections for disabling complex partial seizures.

Surgical outcomes in lesional and non-lesional epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSES To provide evidence-based quantitative summary estimates of seizure outcomes in patients with non-lesional and lesional epilepsy treated with surgery, and to assess the consistency of results among published studies. METHODS An exhaustive literature search identified articles published since 1995, describing outcomes according to lesional status in patients of any age who underwent resective epilepsy surgery. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and extracted the data. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. Random effects meta-analyses were used after assessing the dataset for heterogeneity. RESULTS Forty articles fulfilled eligibility criteria and described outcomes in 697 patients with non-lesional epilepsy and 2860 patients with lesional epilepsy. Overall, the odds of being seizure-free after surgery were 2.5 times higher in patients with lesions on MRI or histopathology (OR 2.5, 95%CI 2.1, 3.0, p<0.001). In patients with temporal lobe epilepsy surgery the odds were 2.7 times higher in those with lesions (OR 2.7, 95%CI 2.1, 3.5, p<0.001). In patients with extratemporal epilepsy surgery the odds were 2.9 higher in those with lesions (OR 2.9, 95%CI 1.6, 5.1, p<0.001). Outcomes were similar in children, adults, and studies that used MRI or histopathology to identify lesions. DISCUSSION Overall, the odds of seizure freedom after surgery are two to three times higher in the presence of a lesion on histopathology or MRI. The results are clinically and statistically significant, consistent across various subgroups, and quite homogeneous across studies.

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).

ILAE classification of the epilepsies: Position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology

The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Classification of the Epilepsies has been updated to reflect our gain in understanding of the epilepsies and their underlying mechanisms following the major scientific advances that have taken place since the last ratified classification in 1989. As a critical tool for the practicing clinician, epilepsy classification must be relevant and dynamic to changes in thinking, yet robust and translatable to all areas of the globe. Its primary purpose is for diagnosis of patients, but it is also critical for epilepsy research, development of antiepileptic therapies, and communication around the world. The new classification originates from a draft document submitted for public comments in 2013, which was revised to incorporate extensive feedback from the international epilepsy community over several rounds of consultation. It presents three levels, starting with seizure type, where it assumes that the patient is having epileptic seizures as defined by the new 2017 ILAE Seizure Classification. After diagnosis of the seizure type, the next step is diagnosis of epilepsy type, including focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy, combined generalized, and focal epilepsy, and also an unknown epilepsy group. The third level is that of epilepsy syndrome, where a specific syndromic diagnosis can be made. The new classification incorporates etiology along each stage, emphasizing the need to consider etiology at each step of diagnosis, as it often carries significant treatment implications. Etiology is broken into six subgroups, selected because of their potential therapeutic consequences. New terminology is introduced such as developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. The term benign is replaced by the terms self‐limited and pharmacoresponsive, to be used where appropriate. It is hoped that this new framework will assist in improving epilepsy care and research in the 21st century.