Search

Background: Seizure clusters, prolonged seizures, and status epilepticus are life-threatening neurological emergencies leading to irreversible neuronal damage. Benzodiazepines are current evidence-based rescue therapy options; however, recent investigations indicated the prescription of mainly unsuitable benzodiazepines and inappropriate use of rescue medication., Objective: To examine current use, satisfaction, and adverse events concerning rescue medication in patients with epilepsy in Germany., Patients and Methods: The study was conducted at epilepsy centres in Frankfurt am Main, Greifswald, Marburg, and Münster between 10/2020 and 12/2020. Patients with an epilepsy diagnosis were assessed based on a questionnaire examining a 12-month period., Results: In total, 486 patients (mean age: 40.5, range 18-83, 58.2 % female) participated in this study, of which 125 (25.7 %) reported the use of rescue medication. The most frequently prescribed rescue medications were lorazepam tablets (56.8 %, n = 71 out of 125), buccal midazolam (19.2 %, n = 24), and rectal diazepam (10.4 %, n = 13). Seizures continuing for over several minutes (43.2 %, n = 54), seizure clusters (28.0 %, n = 35), and epileptic auras (28.0 %, n = 35) were named as indications, while 28.0 % (n = 35) stated they administered the rescue medication for every seizure. Of those continuing to have seizures, 46.0 % did not receive rescue medication. On average, rescue medication prescription occurred 7.1 years (SD 12.7, range 0-66) after an epilepsy diagnosis., Conclusions: Unsuitable oral benzodiazepines remain widely prescribed for epilepsy patients as rescue medication. Patients also reported inappropriate use of medication. A substantial proportion of patients who were not seizure-free did not receive rescue medication prescriptions. Offering each patient at risk for prolonged seizures or clusters of seizures an individual rescue treatment with instructions on using it may decrease mortality and morbidity and increase quality of life. ., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement M. Maltseva received a grant from the German Research Foundation outside the submitted work. F. v. Podewils has received speaker honoraria from Bial, Eisai, GW Pharmaceutical companies, Angelini Pharma, Zogenix, and UCB Pharma and scientific advisory board honoraria from GW Pharmaceutical companies, UCB Pharma, and Angelini Pharma. L. Habermehl has received support from Jazz Pharma, Zogenix, and Angelini Pharma in the form of reimbursed travelling expenses and training costs. L. Langenbruch reports speaker's honoraria from Eisai, Biogen, and GW Pharmaceuticals. S. Knake reports personal fees from Arvelle Therapeutics, Bial, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, Epilog, UCB Pharma, and Zogenix. F. Rosenow reports personal fees from Angelini Pharma, Desitin Pharma, Eisai GmbH, and UCB Pharma and grants from the Detlev-Wrobel-Fonds for Epilepsy Research, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), the LOEWE Programme of the State of Hesse, and the European Union, and from the Dr Senckenbergische Stiftung, the Reiss Stiftung, and the Ernst Max von Grunelius Foundation Frankfurt. L. Kämppi reports speakers’ honoraria from UCB and Eisai, congress/travel support from Angelini Pharma, and personal grants from the Michael Foundation, Finnish Neurology Association, and HUS Neurocenter. C. Mann was supported by the Hessian state to promote female scientists and reports speakers’ honoraria from UCB and travel support from Zogenix outside the submitted work. A. Strzelczyk reports personal fees and grants from Angelini Pharma, Biocodex, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Marinus Pharma, Precisis, Takeda, UCB Pharma, and UNEEG Medical. We confirm that we have read the Journal's position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Telehealth can improve the treatment of chronic disorders, such as epilepsy. Telehealth prevalence and use increased during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, familiarity with and use of telehealth and health-related mobile applications (apps) by persons with epilepsy remain unknown. Methods: We investigated telehealth use, demographics, and clinical variables within the multicenter Epi2020 cross-sectional study. Between October and December 2020, adults with epilepsy completed a validated questionnaire, including individual questions regarding knowledge and use of apps and telehealth. Results: Of 476 included individuals (58.2% women; mean age 40.2 ± 15.4 years), 41.6% reported using health-related apps. Health apps were used more frequently (pedometer 32.1%, exercise app 17.6%) than medical apps (health insurance 15.1%, menstrual apps 12.2%) or apps designed for epilepsy (medication reminders 10.3%, seizure calendars 4.6%). Few used seizure detectors (i.e., apps as medical devices 1.9%) or mobile health devices (fitness bracelet 11.3%). A majority (60.9%) had heard the term telehealth, 78.6% of whom had a positive view. However, only 28.6% had a concrete idea of telehealth, and only 16.6% reported personal experience with telehealth. A majority (55%) would attend a teleconsultation follow-up, and 41.2% would in a medical emergency. Data privacy and availability were considered equally important by 50.8%, 21.8% considered data privacy more important, and 20.2% considered data availability more important. Current health-related app use was independently associated with younger age ( p  = 0.003), higher education ( p < 0.001), and subjective COVID-19-related challenges ( p  = 0.002). Persistent seizure occurrence (vs. seizure freedom ≥12 months) did not affect willingness to use teleconsultations on multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusions: Despite positive telehealth views, few persons with epilepsy in Germany are familiar with specific apps or services. Socioeconomic factors influence telehealth use more than baseline epilepsy characteristics. Telehealth education and services should target socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals to reduce the digital care gap. German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00022024; Universal Trial Number: U1111-1252-5331).

Objective: Epilepsy is a chronic condition that can affect patients of all ages. Women with epilepsy (WWE) require access to specific counseling and information regarding issues related to contraception, pregnancy, and hormonal effects on seizure control and bone mineral density. This study investigated the knowledge among WWE regarding their condition, and whether epilepsy-specific knowledge has improved over the last 15 years., Methods: A total of 280 WWE aged 18 to 82 years participated in this multicenter, questionnaire-based study. The study was conducted at four epilepsy centers in Germany, between October 2020 and December 2020. Sociodemographic and epilepsy-specific data for participating women were analyzed and compared with the results of a similar survey performed in 2003-2005 among 365 WWE in Germany., Results: The questionnaire-based survey revealed considerable knowledge deficits without significant improvements over the last 15 years, particularly among those with less education and with regards to information on the more pronounced effects of epilepsy in older WWE (>50 years), including interactions with menopause and osteoporosis. In WWE ≤29 years, a significant increase in the knowledge score was observed in 2020 compared with this age group in 2005 (mean 7.42 vs. 6.5, p = .036). Mothers frequently reported epilepsy-related concerns regarding childrearing, particularly of seizures scaring their child and the need to rely on other people., Conclusion: WWE continue to demonstrate inadequate epilepsy-related knowledge. Despite increasing information availability and the aspiration toward better awareness among medical professionals, overall knowledge has not increased sufficiently compared with the levels observed in recent studies., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: This study was undertaken to calculate epilepsy-related direct, indirect, and total costs in adult patients with active epilepsy (ongoing unprovoked seizures) in Germany and to analyze cost components and dynamics compared to previous studies from 2003, 2008, and 2013. This analysis was part of the Epi2020 study., Methods: Direct and indirect costs related to epilepsy were calculated with a multicenter survey using an established and validated questionnaire with a bottom-up design and human capital approach over a 3-month period in late 2020. Epilepsy-specific costs in the German health care sector from 2003, 2008, and 2013 were corrected for inflation to allow for a valid comparison., Results: Data on the disease-specific costs for 253 patients in 2020 were analyzed. The mean total costs were calculated at €5551 (±€5805, median = €2611, range = €274-€21 667) per 3 months, comprising mean direct costs of €1861 (±€1905, median = €1276, range = €327-€13 158) and mean indirect costs of €3690 (±€5298, median = €0, range = €0-€11 925). The main direct cost components were hospitalization (42.4%), antiseizure medication (42.2%), and outpatient care (6.2%). Productivity losses due to early retirement (53.6%), part-time work or unemployment (30.8%), and seizure-related off-days (15.6%) were the main reasons for indirect costs. However, compared to 2013, there was no significant increase of direct costs (-10.0%), and indirect costs significantly increased (p < .028, +35.1%), resulting in a significant increase in total epilepsy-related costs (p < .047, +20.2%). Compared to the 2013 study population, a significant increase of cost of illness could be observed (p = .047)., Significance: The present study shows that disease-related costs in adult patients with active epilepsy increased from 2013 to 2020. As direct costs have remained constant, this increase is attributable to an increase in indirect costs. These findings highlight the impact of productivity loss caused by early retirement, unemployment, working time reduction, and seizure-related days off., (© 2022 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Introduction: The prescription patterns of antiseizure medication (ASM) are subject to new scientific evidence and sociodemographic and practical aspects. This study analyzed trends in ASM prescription patterns among all adults with epilepsy, with special consideration for women of childbearing potential (WOCBP) and older adult (≥65 years old) patients., Methods: Data from four questionnaire-based cohort studies, conducted in 2008, 2013, 2016, and 2020, were analyzed for ASM prescription frequencies and common mono- and dual therapy regimens. Statistical comparisons were performed with the Chi-square test and one-way analysis of variance., Results: Overall, the individual prescription patterns among 1,642 adult patients with epilepsy were analyzed. A significant increase in the prescription frequency of third-generation ASMs, from 59.3% to 84.2% (p = 0.004), was accompanied by a decrease in the frequency of first- and second-generation ASMs (5.4% to 2.1% and 34.9% to 12.6%, respectively). This trend was accompanied by a significant decrease in the use of enzyme-inducing ASMs, from 23.9% to 4.6% (p = 0.004). Among frequently prescribed ASMs, prescriptions of carbamazepine (18.6% to 3.1%, p = 0.004) and valproate (15.4% to 8.7%, p = 0.004) decreased, whereas prescriptions of levetiracetam (18.0% up to 32.4%, p = 0.004) increased significantly. The prescription frequency of lamotrigine remained largely constant at approximately 20% (p = 0.859). Among WOCBP, the prescription frequencies of carbamazepine (11.4% to 2.0%, p = 0.004) and valproate (16.1% to 6.1%, p = 0.004) decreased significantly. Levetiracetam monotherapy prescriptions increased significantly (6.6% to 30.4%, p = 0.004) for WOCBP, whereas lamotrigine prescriptions remained consistent (37.7% to 44.9%, p = 0.911). Among older adult patients, a significant decrease in carbamazepine prescriptions (30.1% to 7.8%, p = 0.025) was the only relevant change in ASM regimens between 2008 and 2020. In patients with genetic generalized epilepsies, levetiracetam was frequently used as an off-label monotherapy (25.0% to 35.3%)., Conclusion: These results show a clear trend toward the use of newer and less interacting third-generation ASMs, with lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and lacosamide representing the current ASMs of choice, displacing valproate and carbamazepine over the last decade. In WOCBP, prescription patterns shifted to minimize teratogenic effects, whereas, among older adults, the decrease in carbamazepine use may reflect the avoidance of hyponatremia risks and attempts to reduce the interaction potential with other drugs and ASMs. Levetiracetam is frequently used off-label as a monotherapy in patients with genetic generalized epilepsy., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To analyze the concerns and worries about planning to have children and being a parent as a person with epilepsy and investigate gender differences in these perceptions., Methods: The Epi2020 study was a large multicenter study focusing on different healthcare aspects of adult patients with epilepsy in Germany. In addition to basic clinical and demographic characteristics, patients were asked to answer a questionnaire regarding their plan to have children, if they had children, and concerns about their children's health. Data were analyzed to detect differences between men and women with epilepsy according to age group., Results: In total, 477 patients with epilepsy with a mean age of 40.5 years (SD = 15.5, range: 18-83 years) participated in this study; 280 (58.7%) were female and 197 (41.3%) were male. Both women and men frequently reported concerns and worries about having children: In the age group below 45 years of age, 72.5% of women and 58.2% of men described being worried to some extent that their children may also suffer from epilepsy (p = .006). Furthermore, 67.3% of women and 54.2% of men below the age of 45 years reported being worried that their children may be disabled (p = .003). Women were more likely to have family members who are reluctant to support their desire to have children (p = .048)., Conclusion: Women with epilepsy of childbearing age are significantly more likely to report major concerns that their children might be disabled or also have epilepsy than men with epilepsy and, therefore, express more concerns about choosing to have a child. However, men also report frequent concerns and worries, and this should be addressed not only on request but should be included in the provision of general information on epilepsy., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement CM reports speakers’ honoraria from Eisai and travel support from GW Pharmaceuticals, outside of the submitted work. FvP has received speaker honoraria from Bial, Eisai, GW Pharmaceutical companies, Angelini Pharma, Zogenix and UCB Pharma; and scientific advisory board honoraria from GW Pharmaceutical companies, UCB Pharma, and Angelini Pharma. LL reports speaker’s honoraria from Eisai, GW pharmaceuticals, and Biogen. FR reports personal fees from Angelini Pharma/Arvelle Therapeutics, Eisai GmbH, GW Pharmaceuticals/Jazz Pharma, and UCB Pharma and grants from the Detlev-Wrobel-Fonds for Epilepsy Research, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), the LOEWE Programme of the State of Hesse, and the European Union. AS reports personal fees and grants from Angelini Pharma/Arvelle Therapeutics, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals, Marinus Pharma, Medtronic, UCB, UNEEG Medical, and Zogenix. ASüß, FZ, LB, KM, JS, and BG have nothing to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study was undertaken to quantify epilepsy-related costs of illness (COI) in Germany and identify cost-driving factors., Methods: COI were calculated among adults with epilepsy of different etiologies and severities. Multiple regression analysis was applied to determine any epilepsy-related and sociodemographic factors that serve as cost-driving factors., Results: In total, 486 patients were included, with a mean age of 40.5 ± 15.5 years (range = 18-83 years, 58.2% women). Mean 3-month COI were estimated at €4911, €2782, and €2598 for focal, genetic generalized, and unclassified epilepsy, respectively. The mean COI for patients with drug-refractory epilepsy (DRE; €7850) were higher than those for patients with non-DRE (€4720), patients with occasional seizures (€3596), or patients with seizures in remission for >1 year (€2409). Identified cost-driving factors for total COI included relevant disability (unstandardized regression coefficient b = €2218), poorer education (b = €2114), living alone (b = €2612), DRE (b = €1831), and frequent seizures (b = €2385). Younger age groups of 18-24 years (b = -€2945) and 25-34 years (b = -€1418) were found to have lower overall expenditures. A relevant disability (b = €441), DRE (b = €1253), frequent seizures (b = €735), and the need for specialized daycare (b = €749) were associated with higher direct COI, and poorer education (b = €1969), living alone (b = €2612), the presence of a relevant disability (b = €1809), DRE (b = €1831), and frequent seizures (b = €2385) were associated with higher indirect COI., Significance: This analysis provides up-to-date COI data for use in further health economics analyses, highlighting the high economic impacts associated with disease severity, disability, and disease-related loss of productivity among adult patients with epilepsy. The identified cost drivers could be used as therapeutic and socioeconomic targets for future cost-containment strategies., (© 2022 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Background: The current diagnostic criteria for autoimmune limbic encephalitis (LE) stress bilaterality of temporal MRI and EEG findings. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine whether bilaterality is indeed more common in LE than in other mesiotemporal epilepsies., Methods: We compared EEG findings mostly from long-term EEG monitoring in patients with LE (n=59), hippocampal sclerosis (HS, n=44), and mesiotemporal tumors (n=24)., Results: Bilateral temporal EEG findings including temporal slowing, interictal epileptiform discharges (IED), and seizures were equally frequent with 37% in LE, 32% in HS, and 17% in tumor patients. Bilateral independent temporal seizures were infrequent with 3%, 9%, and 0%, respectively. Patients with seropositive LE more often showed an EEG without IED or seizure patterns than patients with seronegative LE (n=37) with a higher proportion of unilateral temporal findings. Patients with immunotherapy naïve LE (n=40) showed a higher proportion of bilateral temporal IED or slowing in comparison with tumor patients., Conclusions: We conclude that unilateral or absent temporal EEG findings are common in LE and should not discourage this differential diagnosis., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Status epilepticus (SE) can occur in persons with or without epilepsy and is associated with high morbidity and mortality., Methods: This survey aimed to record self-reported frequency of SE in persons with epilepsy, its association with clinical characteristics and patient level of information on SE and rescue medication. 251 persons with epilepsy at a tertiary epilepsy center were included in the study., Results: 87 (35%) had a history of SE defined as seizure duration of more than 5 min. These patients were less likely to be seizure-free, and had a higher number of present and past anti-seizure medication. Female sex, cognitive disability, younger age at epilepsy onset, defined epilepsy etiology, and focal epilepsy were associated with a history of SE. On Cox regression analysis, female sex, defined etiology and focal classification remained significant. 67% stated that they had information about prolonged seizures, and 75% knew about rescue medication. 85% found it desirable to receive information about SE at the time of initial diagnosis of epilepsy, but only 16% had been offered such information at the time., Conclusion: SE is frequent among persons with epilepsy and there remain unmet needs regarding patient education., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: This study was undertaken to evaluate the long-term efficacy, retention, and tolerability of add-on brivaracetam (BRV) in clinical practice., Methods: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study recruited all patients who initiated BRV between February and November 2016, with observation until February 2021., Results: Long-term data for 262 patients (mean age = 40 years, range = 5-81 years, 129 men) were analyzed, including 227 (87%) diagnosed with focal epilepsy, 19 (7%) with genetic generalized epilepsy, and 16 (6%) with other or unclassified epilepsy syndromes. Only 26 (10%) patients had never received levetiracetam (LEV), whereas 133 (50.8%) were switched from LEV. The length of BRV exposure ranged from 1 day to 5 years, with a median retention time of 1.6 years, resulting in a total BRV exposure time of 6829 months (569 years). The retention rate was 61.1% at 12 months, with a reported efficacy of 33.1% (79/239; 50% responder rate, 23 patients lost-to-follow-up), including 10.9% reported as seizure-free. The retention rate for the entire study period was 50.8%, and at last follow-up, 133 patients were receiving BRV at a mean dose of 222 ± 104 mg (median = 200, range = 25-400), including 52 (39.1%) who exceeded the recommended upper dose of 200 mg. Fewer concomitant antiseizure medications and switching from LEV to BRV correlated with better short-term responses, but no investigated parameters correlated with positive long-term outcomes. BRV was discontinued in 63 (24%) patients due to insufficient efficacy, in 29 (11%) for psychobehavioral adverse events, in 25 (10%) for other adverse events, and in 24 (9%) for other reasons., Significance: BRV showed a clinically useful 50% responder rate of 33% at 12 months and overall retention of >50%, despite 90% of included patients having previous LEV exposure. BRV was well tolerated; however, psychobehavioral adverse events occurred in one out of 10 patients. Although we identified short-term response and retention predictors, we could not identify significant predictors for long-term outcomes., (© 2021 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Patients with seizures and epilepsy routinely undergo multiple diagnostic tests, which may include cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis. This review aims to outline different CSF parameters and their alterations in seizures or epilepsy. We then discuss the utility of CSF analysis in seizure patients in different clinical settings in depth. Some routine CSF parameters are frequently altered after seizures, but are not specific such as CSF protein and lactate. Pleocytosis and CSF specific oligoclonal bands are rare and should be considered as signs of infectious or immune mediated seizures and epilepsy. Markers of neuronal damage show conflicting results, and are as yet not established in clinical practice. Parameters of neuronal degeneration and more specific immune parameters are less well studied, and are areas of further research. CSF analysis in new-onset seizures or status epilepticus serves well in the differential diagnosis of seizure etiology. Here, considerations should include autoimmune-associated seizures. CSF findings in these disorders are a special focus of this review and are summarized in a comprehensive overview. Until now, CSF analysis has not yielded clinically helpful biomarkers for refractory epilepsy or for assessment of neuronal damage which is a subject of further studies., (Copyright © 2021 British Epilepsy Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Brivaracetam (BRV) is the latest approved antiepileptic drug and acts as a synaptic vesicle protein 2A ligand. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of BRV in the clinical setting., Design: Retrospective, observational multicentre study., Setting: We retrospectively collected clinical data of patients who received BRV in 10 epilepsy centres using a questionnaire that was answered by the reporting neurologist., Participants: Data of 615 epilepsy patients treated with BRV were included in the study., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Efficacy regarding seizure frequency and tolerability of BRV were evaluated. Descriptive statistics complemented by X 2 contingency tests and effect sizes were performed., Results: Overall, 44% of the patients had a decreased, 38% a stable and 18% an increased seizure frequency. 17% of patients achieved seizure freedom after initiation of BRV. The seizure frequency decreased in 63% of 19 patients with BRV monotherapy. 27% reported adverse effects, but only 10% of patients with monotherapy. Brivaracetam was significantly more often associated with decreased seizure frequency in levetiracetam (LEV) naïve patients (p=0.012), but BRV also led to a decreased seizure frequency in 42% of patients who had been treated with LEV before, including 17% of patients who were completely seizure free. Adverse effects under LEV improved in 62% and deteriorated in 2% of patients after the switch to BRV. At latest follow-up (mean±SD = 26.3±6.5 months), 68% were still on BRV., Conclusions: The present study shows that results of the phase III studies on BRV match data from real life clinical settings. Brivaracetam seems to be a useful alternative in patients who have suffered adverse effects while taking LEV., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KM has received honoraria as advisory board member from Eisai and UCB. FR has received personal fees from Bayer-Vital, Cerbomed, Eisai, Hexal and Sandoz, personal fees and support for continuing medical education activities from Desitin, Novartis, Shire and UCB Pharma and grants from DFG (German Research Foundation) and the European Union. SS-B reports personal fees from UCB, Eisai, Desitin Pharma, LivaNova, Bial, Novartis and Zogenix outside of the submitted work. FVP reports industry-funded travel with support of Desitin Arzneimittel, UCB Pharma, Eisai Pharma and BIAL, obtained honoraria for speaking engagements from Desitin Arzneimittel, UCB Pharma, Eisai Pharma and BIAL and was part of a speaker’s bureau of Desitin Arzneimittel, UCB Pharma and BIAL. RK reports industry-funded travel with support of Eisai Pharma and Desitin Arzneimittel. MH has received honoraria for lectures from pharmaceutical companies (Eisai, UCB) and research support for participation in clinical trials and registries from Medtronic, Cyberonics and Precisis. TM has received travel expenses for attending a meeting from UCB Pharma. YW received travel grants and honoraries for lectures from UCB Pharma, BIAL, Eisai, Bayer and Novartis, which were not related to the publication. LL has received lecture honoraria from Eisai. MC has received travel expenses for attending meetings from Desitin and Zogenix. AS reports personal fees and/or grants from Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharma, LivaNova, Medtronic, Sage Therapeutics, UCB Pharma and Zogenix. SK reports honoraria for speaking engagements from Desitin and UCB as well as educational grants from AD Tech, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW, Medtronic, Novartis, Siemens and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Seizures and epilepsy may substantially add to the burden of disease in multiple sclerosis (MS), whereas the exact prevalence and prognosis of seizures and epilepsy in patients with MS remains largely unknown., Objectives: We aimed to investigate the epidemiology and prognosis of seizures and epilepsy in MS., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 4078 MS patients from a single tertiary referral clinic., Results: After excluding 37 patients with unconfirmed MS and alternative seizure etiologies, we found seizures attributable to MS in 1.5% and epilepsy in 0.9% of patients. 40.4% of patients with a follow-up of at least twelve months experienced only a single seizure and 59.6% had recurring seizures. 39% of patients with recurrent seizures were considered drug-resistant, with 9.7% experiencing status epilepticus. Seizure recurrence after a first seizure depended significantly on the MS subtype and was seen more often if the first seizure occurred simultaneously with a MS relapse than in the absence of a relapse., Conclusion: Our study shows a lower number of seizures and epilepsy in MS than previously reported. While a single seizure in MS usually has a good prognosis, relapse-associated seizures and established epilepsy in MS may not be as benign as previously assumed.