Search

PURPOSE: To assess whether performance in attention and executive functions evaluated with the Epitrack screening tool before surgery can differentiate memory and quality of life (QOL) profiles, and detect different post-surgical change patterns in these variables in patients with epilepsy. METHODS: This is a longitudinal study. Seventy-seven patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (mean age = 37.91) underwent a neuropsychological assessment before and one year after surgery. Epitrack, a screening tool that exclusively evaluates attention and executive functioning, was administered in the pre-surgical assessment, and verbal and visual memory and QOL were assessed before and after surgery. RESULTS: Patients with impaired Epitrack performance had poorer verbal and visual memory than those with intact Epitrack performance, regardless of the time point (for all, p < 0.0001). They also showed a post-surgical decline in immediate verbal recall (p = 0.04) and discriminability (p = 0.001). Patients with intact Epitrack performance did not exhibit this decline. Epitrack total score significantly contributed to 13 and 11% of the variance of post-surgical changes in immediate verbal recall and discriminability, respectively. Epitrack groups did not differ in QOL profiles or changes, but post-surgical immediate verbal recall improvements were related to post-surgical QOL improvements. CONCLUSION: Our findings underline the utility of Epitrack screening tool to detect different patterns of verbal and visual memory dysfunction, as well as to predict post-surgical verbal memory decline in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Patients with lower pre-surgical Epitrack scores appear to be at increased risk for post-surgical memory decline.

To assess whether cognitive performance predicts quality of life (QOL) in patients with drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), using the Epitrack cognitive screening tool, while considering the mediating role of the number of anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and controlling for seizure-related, social, and emotional factors.

Surgery is a well-demonstrated effective treatment for patients with refractory epilepsy. However, there are scarce data about the efficacy in older patients. Endpoint was to evaluate the outcome of epilepsy surgery in pharmacorresistant patients operated in middle-late adulthood.

In this narrative review, we summarize the current knowledge of neurally mediated blood pressure (BP) control and discuss how recently described epilepsy- and seizure-related BP alterations may contribute to premature mortality and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). Although people with epilepsy display disturbed interictal autonomic function with a shift toward predominant sympathetic activity, prevalence of arterial hypertension is similar in people with and without epilepsy. BP is transiently increased in association with most types of epileptic seizures but may also decrease in some, illustrating that seizure activity can cause both a decrease and increase of BP, probably because of stimulation or inhibition of distinct central autonomic function by epileptic activity that propagates into different neuronal networks of the central autonomic nervous system. The principal regulatory neural loop for short-term BP control is termed baroreflex, mainly involving peripheral sensors and brain stem nuclei. The baroreflex sensitivity (BRS, expressed as change of interbeat interval per change in BP) is intact after focal seizures, whereas BRS is markedly impaired in the early postictal period following generalized convulsive seizures (GCS), possibly due to metabolically mediated muscular hyperemia in skeletal muscles, a massive release of catecholamines and compromised brain stem function. Whilst most SUDEP cases are probably caused by a cardiorespiratory failure during the early postictal period following GCS, a profoundly disturbed BRS may allow a life-threatening drop of systemic BP in the aftermath of GCS, as recently reported in a patient as a plausible cause of SUDEP in a few patients.

Introduction. Epileptic seizures and epilepsy are part of daily clinical practice in neurology. Yet, the number of false positive diagnoses is surprisingly high. Almost one out of every five patients treated for epilepsy does not really have this diagnosis, which is a high percentage bearing in mind the social and medical consequences that being diagnosed with epilepsy entails. Aims. To summarise the most important diagnostic challenges in epilepsy, to describe possible sources of diagnostic error and to offer advice on how to avoid them. Development. Epilepsy is characterised by a tendency to suffer unprovoked epileptic seizures. The greatest obstacle when it comes to diagnosing a case of epilepsy is the fact that epileptic seizures are transient phenomena that occur relatively infrequently and the physician who must carry out the diagnosis will rarely see them. Moreover, there are other clinical events, such as syncopes or non-epileptic seizures, that may be similar to epileptic seizures in appearance and, consequently, can be mistaken for them. Finally, when interpreting the two most important complementary diagnostic techniques in epileptology, the electroencephalogram and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, the most common errors must be taken into account in order to prevent mistaken diagnoses. Conclusions. The diagnosis of epilepsy is a challenge and must be based on a detailed and specific medical record. If there are any reasonable doubts, from the outset, about the diagnosis of epilepsy or if the patient does not respond well to the antiepileptic treatment, we recommend referring the patient to a specialised centre to establish a definitive diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is the most frequent cause of premature death in epileptic patients. Most SUDEP events occur at night and frequently go unnoticed; the exact pathophysiological mechanisms of this phenomenon therefore remain undetermined. Nevertheless, most cases of SUDEP are attributed to an infrequent yet extremely severe complication of epileptic seizures. DEVELOPMENT: We conducted a systematic literature search on PubMed. Our review article summarises scientific evidence on the classification, pathophysiological mechanisms, risk factors, biomarkers, and prevention of SUDEP. Likewise, we propose new lines of research and critically analyse findings that are relevant to clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Current knowledge suggests that SUDEP is a heterogeneous phenomenon caused by multiple factors. In most cases, however, SUDEP is thought to be due to postictal cardiorespiratory failure triggered by generalised tonic-clonic seizures and ultimately leading to cardiac arrest. The underlying pathophysiological mechanism involves multiple factors, ranging from genetic predisposition to environmental factors. Risk of SUDEP is higher in young adults with uncontrolled generalised tonic-clonic seizures. However, patients apparently at lower risk may also experience SUDEP. Current research focuses on identifying genetic and neuroimaging biomarkers that may help determine which patients are at high risk for SUDEP. Antiepileptic treatment is the only preventive measure proven effective to date. Night-time monitoring together with early resuscitation may reduce the risk of SUDEP.