Search

Marco Mula1, Dale C Hesdorffer21Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Amedeo Avogadro University and Division of Neurology, University Hospital Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy; 2Gertrude H Sergievsky Center and Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USAAbstract: Two years after the warning issued by the Food and Drug Administration on an increased risk of suicide for people taking antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), a number of pharmacoepidemiologic studies have been published but the scientific community is far from definitive answers. The present paper is aimed at reviewing available evidence on the association between AEDs and suicidal behavior, discussing major variables involved such as the relationship between epilepsy, depression, and suicide and the psychotropic potential of AEDs. All studies published so far show a lack of concordance and are constrained by various methodological limitations. What seems to be established is that mood disorders represent a frequent comorbidity in epilepsy and suicide is a serious complication more frequently encountered in epilepsy rather than in the general population. Moreover, a subgroup of patients appears to be at risk of developing treatment-emergent psychiatric adverse effects of AEDs independently of the specific mechanism of action of the drug. The prior history of suicide attempt, especially preceding the onset of the epilepsy, may represent a key element explaining why what is observed is independent of the specific mechanism of the drug. In general terms, risks associated with stopping, or not even starting, AEDs in epilepsy might well be in excess of the risk of suicide in epilepsy, as deaths due to accident and epilepsy itself may predominate. Clinicians need to pay attention not only to seizure patterns when choosing the appropriate AED but also to a number of different parameters (eg, age, gender, working needs, medical comorbidities, history of psychiatric disorders, and suicidality before epilepsy onset) and not the least the mental state of the patient. Missing severe complications such as suicidal behavior or delaying its treatment may worsen the prognosis of epilepsy.Keywords: antiepileptic drugs, suicide, depression, epilepsy, FDA

2005 m. sukurtas teorinis apibrėžimas epilepsiją apibūdino kaip galvos smegenų sutrikimą, kuriam būdingas ilgalaikis polinkis kilti epilepsijos priepuoliams. Praktiškai ilgalaikis polinkis kilti epilepsijos priepuoliams paprastai nustatomas pasireiškus dviem epilepsijos priepuoliams, kai laiko tarpas tarp jų viršija 24 val. Tarptautinė lyga prieš epilepsiją (angl. International League Against Epilepsy, ILAE) patvirtino darbo grupės rekomendacijas situacijoms, kurios neatitinka dviejų neprovokuotų priepuolių kriterijaus, vertinti. Darbo grupė pasiūlė, kad epilepsija būtų laikoma galvos smegenų liga, atitinkanti bent vieną iš minėtų sąlygų: 1) mažiausiai du neprovokuoti (ar refleksiniai) priepuoliai, kai laiko tarpas tarp jų yra daugiau nei 24 val.; 2) vienas neprovokuotas (ar refleksinis) priepuolis, kai pakartotinių priepuolių tikimybė per ateinančius 10 metų yra tokia pati, kaip po 2 neprovokuotų priepuolių (mažiausiai 60 %); 3) epilepsijos sindromo diagnozė. Epilepsija laikoma atsitraukusia asmenims, kurie turėjo nuo amžiaus priklausomą epilepsijos sindromą ir šiuo metu yra vyresni, nei pasireiškimo amžius, taip pat tiems, kuriems priepuoliai nesikartoja mažiausiai 10 metų, iš kurių mažiausiai pastaruosius 5 metus pacientas nevartoja vaistų nuo epilepsijos. „Atsitraukusios“ ligos terminas nėra identiškas tradiciniam „remisijos“ ar „išgijimo“ apibrėžimui. Skirtingi praktiniai apibrėžimai gali būti suformuluoti ir taikomi įvairiais specifiniais tikslais. Sis patikslintas apibrėžimas labiau atitinka įprastinį ligos supratimą. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Interictal dysphoric disorder (IDD) has been regarded as an affective disorder occurring only in people with epilepsy (PWE). Data showing similar characteristics and similar prevalence of IDD in patients with migraine and with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures question the epilepsy-specific nature of IDD. The aim of the study was to investigate the nature of IDD in people with prevalent epilepsy with mood disorders and people with mood disorders who are free of neurological disease., Methods: This is a case-control study, with 142 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of epilepsy and major depressive disorder (MDD; cases) and 222 patients with MDD only (controls). MDD diagnosis was confirmed by a structured clinical interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (SCID-I-RV). We used the Beck Depression Inventory and the Beck Anxiety Inventory to estimate anxiety and depression levels and the Interictal Dysphoric Disorder Inventory (IDDI) to confirm the presence of IDD. Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson chi-squared, Spearman correlation, and logistic regression were used., Results: No differences were found in the prevalence of IDD between PWE with MDD and people with MDD alone (88.73% vs. 85.13%, χ2 = .96, p = .32). There were no differences between the groups overall or for any IDDI subscales (all p > .05). In both groups, IDD symptoms were grouped with the same incidence and had the same duration and periodicity. IDD was not associated with epilepsy (odds ratio = .84, 95% confidence interval = .40-1.98, p = .72). No significant correlation was found between epilepsy, demographic characteristics, and all IDDI subscales (all p > .05). Notably, patients with IDD suffered from affective disorders longer (6.68 ± 6.82 years vs. 3.7 ± 3.97 years, p = .001) and also received higher scores on all psychometric scales (all p < .05)., Significance: This study does not confirm the specificity of IDD for epilepsy. The presence of IDD symptoms may be associated with a more severe course of MDD and significant anxiety distress., (© 2021 International League Against Epilepsy.)

Objective: To develop and validate a tool for individualized prediction of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) risk, we reanalyzed data from 1 cohort and 3 case-control studies undertaken from 1980 through 2005., Methods: We entered 1,273 epilepsy cases (287 SUDEP, 986 controls) and 22 clinical predictor variables into a Bayesian logistic regression model., Results: Cross-validated individualized model predictions were superior to baseline models developed from only average population risk or from generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency (pairwise difference in leave-one-subject-out expected log posterior density = 35.9, SEM ± 12.5, and 22.9, SEM ± 11.0, respectively). The mean cross-validated (95% bootstrap confidence interval) area under the receiver operating curve was 0.71 (0.68-0.74) for our model vs 0.38 (0.33-0.42) and 0.63 (0.59-0.67) for the baseline average and generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency models, respectively. Model performance was weaker when applied to nonrepresented populations. Prognostic factors included generalized tonic-clonic and focal-onset seizure frequency, alcohol excess, younger age at epilepsy onset, and family history of epilepsy. Antiseizure medication adherence was associated with lower risk., Conclusions: Even when generalized to unseen data, model predictions are more accurate than population-based estimates of SUDEP. Our tool can enable risk-based stratification for biomarker discovery and interventional trials. With further validation in unrepresented populations, it may be suitable for routine individualized clinical decision-making. Clinicians should consider assessment of multiple risk factors, and not focus only on the frequency of convulsions., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Based on a multicenter cohort of people with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis (anti-NMDARE), we describe seizure phenotypes, electroencephalographic (EEG) findings, and anti-seizure treatment strategies. We also investigated whether specific electrographic features are associated with persistent seizures or status epilepticus after acute presentation. In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed records of children and adults with anti-NMDARE between 2010 and 2014 who were included in the Rare Epilepsy of New York City database, which included the text of physician notes from five academic medical centers. Clinical history (e.g., seizure semiology) and EEG features (e.g., background organization, slowing, epileptiform activity, seizures, sleep architecture, extreme delta brush) were abstracted. We compared clinical features associated with persistent seizures (ongoing seizures after one month from presentation) and status epilepticus, using bivariate and multivariable analyses. Among the 38 individuals with definite anti-NMDARE, 32 (84%) had seizures and 29 (76%) had seizures captured on EEG. Electrographic-only seizures were identified in five (13%) individuals. Seizures started at a median of four days after initial symptoms (IQR: 3-6 days). Frontal lobe-onset focal seizures were most common (n=12; 32%). Most individuals (31/38; 82%) were refractory to anti-seizure medications. Status epilepticus was associated with younger age (15 years [9-20] vs. 23 years [18-27]; p=0.04) and Hispanic ethnicity (30 [80%] vs. 8 [36%]; p=0.04). Persistent seizures (ongoing seizures after one month from presentation) were associated with younger age (nine years [3-14] vs. 22 years [15-28]; p<0.01). Measured electrographic features were not associated with persistent seizures. Seizures associated with anti-NMDARE are primarily focal seizures originating in the frontal lobes. Younger patients may be at increased risk of epileptogenesis and status epilepticus. Continuous EEG monitoring helps identify subclinical seizures, but specific EEG findings may not predict the severity or persistence of seizures during hospitalization.

Objective: To obtain medical records, family interviews, and death-related reports of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) cases to better understand SUDEP., Methods: All cases referred to the North American SUDEP Registry (NASR) between October 2011 and June 2018 were reviewed; cause of death was determined by consensus review. Available medical records, death scene investigation reports, autopsy reports, and next-of-kin interviews were reviewed for all cases of SUDEP. Seizure type, EEG, MRI, and SUDEP classification were adjudicated by 2 epileptologists., Results: There were 237 definite and probable cases of SUDEP among 530 NASR participants. SUDEP decedents had a median age of 26 (range 1-70) years at death, and 38% were female. In 143 with sufficient information, 40% had generalized and 60% had focal epilepsy. SUDEP affected the full spectrum of epilepsies, from benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (n = 3, 1%) to intractable epileptic encephalopathies (n = 27, 11%). Most (93%) SUDEPs were unwitnessed; 70% occurred during apparent sleep; and 69% of patients were prone. Only 37% of cases of SUDEP took their last dose of antiseizure medications (ASMs). Reported lifetime generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) were <10 in 33% and 0 in 4%., Conclusions: NASR participants commonly have clinical features that have been previously been associated with SUDEP risk such as young adult age, ASM nonadherence, and frequent GTCS. However, a sizeable minority of SUDEP occurred in patients thought to be treatment responsive or to have benign epilepsies. These results emphasize the importance of SUDEP education across the spectrum of epilepsy severities. We aim to make NASR data and biospecimens available for researchers to advance SUDEP understanding and prevention., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: This retrospective study explores to what extent additional information from event witnesses provided using the novel 31-item Paroxysmal Event Observer (PEO) Questionnaire improves the differentiation among epilepsy, syncope, and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) achievable with information provided by patients alone., Methods: Patients with transient loss of consciousness caused by proven epilepsy (n = 86), syncope (n = 79), or PNES (n = 84) attending specialist neurology/syncope services in the United Kingdom and event observers provided Paroxysmal Event Profile (PEP), PEO, and personal information (PI) (e.g., sex, age, medical history) data. PEO data were subjected to exploratory factor analysis (EFA) followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). PEO, PEP, and PI data were used separately and in combination to differentiate diagnoses by pairwise and multinomial logistic regressions. Predicted diagnoses were compared with gold standard medical diagnoses., Results: EFA/CFA identified a 4-factor structure of the PEO based on 26/31 questionnaire items with loadings ≥0.4. Observer-reported factors alone differentiated better between syncope and epilepsy than patient-reported factors (accuracy: 96% vs 85%, p = 0.0004). Observer-reported data improved accuracy over differentiation based on patient-reported data alone from 90% to 100% between syncope and epilepsy ( p = 0.005), 76% to 83% between epilepsy and PNES ( p = 0.006), and 93% to 95% between syncope and PNES ( p = 0.098)., Conclusions: Information from observers can make an important contribution to the differentiation of epilepsy from syncope or PNES but adds less to that of syncope from PNES., (© 2019 American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: To examine the consistency of applying the Nashef et al (2012) criteria to classify sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP)., Methods: We reviewed cases from the North American SUDEP Registry (n = 250) and Medical Examiner Offices (n = 1301: 698 Maryland, 457 New York City, 146 San Diego). Two epileptologists with expertise in SUDEP and epilepsy-related mortality independently reviewed medical records, scene investigation, autopsy, and toxicology and assigned a SUDEP class., Results: Major areas of disagreement arose between adjudicators concerned differentiating (1) Definite SUDEP Plus Comorbidity from Possible SUDEP and (2) Resuscitated (Near) SUDEP from SUDEP. In many cases, distinguishing between contributing and competing causes of death when trying to classify Definite SUDEP Plus Comorbidity versus Possible SUDEP is ambiguous and relies on judgement. Similarly, determining if an intervention was lifesaving or not (Resuscitated SUDEP or Not SUDEP), or if resuscitation merely delayed SUDEP (Resuscitated SUDEP or SUDEP) is often a judgement call and can differ between experienced adjudicators. Given these persisting ambiguities, we propose more explicit criteria for distinguishing these categories., Significance: Accurate and consistent classification of cause of death among individuals with epilepsy remains a dire public health concern. SUDEP is likely underestimated in national health statistics. Greater standardization of criteria among epilepsy researchers, medical examiners, and epidemiologists to determine cause and classify death will lead to more accurate tracking of SUDEP and other epilepsy-related mortalities., (Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2018 International League Against Epilepsy.)

Sudden unexpected death of an individual with epilepsy can pose a challenge to death investigators, as most deaths are unwitnessed, and the individual is commonly found dead in bed. Anatomic findings (eg, tongue/lip bite) are commonly absent and of varying specificity, thereby limiting the evidence to implicate epilepsy as a cause of or contributor to death. Thus it is likely that death certificates significantly underrepresent the true number of deaths in which epilepsy was a factor. To address this, members of the National Association of Medical Examiners, North American SUDEP Registry, Epilepsy Foundation SUDEP Institute, American Epilepsy Society, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention constituted an expert panel to generate evidence-based recommendations for the practice of death investigation and autopsy, toxicological analysis, interpretation of autopsy and toxicology findings, and death certification to improve the precision of death certificate data available for public health surveillance of epilepsy-related deaths. The recommendations provided in this paper are intended to assist medical examiners, coroners, and death investigators when a sudden unexpected death in a person with epilepsy is encountered., (© 2018 National Association of Medical Examiners. This paper has been simultaneously published in Epilepsia. Volume 59, #3 and Academic Forensic Pathology: The Official Publication of the National Association of Medical Examiners, Volume 8, #1.)

Objective: Lack of standardized terminology on death certificates (DCs) of SUDEP type cases may obscure the presence of epilepsy in these deaths. Most DCs for individuals dying unexpectedly with epilepsy are certified by medical examiners (MEs). The purpose of this study was to gauge death certification practices of MEs when interpreting SUDEP cases and assess implications for valid surveillance of SUDEP., Materials and Methods: A survey consisting of clinical vignettes describing deaths in individuals with epilepsy was sent to medical examiners. Respondents were asked to indicate how they would certify death on a DC. Similar text responses were aggregated and coded according to the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) coding system., Results: A total of 847 responses on 11 cases were received. Depending upon the vignette, the proportion of responses within each case that did not have an ICD-10 seizure code ranged from 3% to 62%. G40.9 (Epilepsy, unspecified) resulted from 43% of responses, and R56.8 (Other and unspecified convulsion) resulted from 38% of responses., Conclusion: The survey indicates that a high proportion of DCs do not have a seizure code and would not be identified utilizing these ICD-10 codes. The complicated nature of deaths in SUDEP, unclear circumstances surrounding a given death, and the lack of familiarity with SUDEP by surviving relatives may all contribute to variable terminology used to certify SUDEP deaths. Our results emphasize the need for collaboration between neurologists and forensic pathologists to develop a more uniform approach to death certification in SUDEP that will facilitate SUDEP research and inform relatives of individuals who die of SUDEP., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Through music we can learn much about our human origins and the human brain. Music is a potential method of therapy and a means of accessing and stimulating specific cerebral circuits. There is also an association between musical creativity and psychopathology. This paper provides a brief review.

The North American SUDEP Registry (NASR) is a repository of clinical data and biospecimens in cases of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), a leading cause of epilepsy-related deaths. We assessed whether bereaved families were aware of SUDEP before their family member's death and their preferences for SUDEP disclosure. At enrollment, next-of-kin of SUDEP cases completed an intake interview, including questions assessing premorbid SUDEP discussions. Only 18.1% of the 138 next-of-kin recalled a previous discussion of SUDEP with a healthcare provider or support resource. Of the 112 who did not recall such a discussion, 72.3% wished it was discussed, 10.7% were satisfied it was not discussed, and 17% were unsure. A history of status epilepticus predicted SUDEP discussion. Rates of SUDEP discussion were not significantly higher among SUDEPs after 2013 (the approximate study midpoint) compared with those before then. Our study suggests that SUDEP remains infrequently discussed with family members of persons with epilepsy. Nearly three-quarters of family members wished they had known of SUDEP before the death. However, some were indifferent or were satisfied that this discussion had not occurred. We must balance more systematic education of patients and families about SUDEP while respecting individual preferences about having this discussion., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: The pathogenesis of febrile status epilepticus is poorly understood, but prior studies have suggested an association with temporal lobe abnormalities, including hippocampal malrotation. We used a quantitative morphometric method to assess the association between temporal lobe morphology and febrile status epilepticus., Materials and Methods: Brain MR imaging was performed in children presenting with febrile status epilepticus and control subjects as part of the Consequences of Prolonged Febrile Seizures in Childhood study. Medial temporal lobe morphologic parameters were measured manually, including the distance of the hippocampus from the midline, hippocampal height:width ratio, hippocampal angle, collateral sulcus angle, and width of the temporal horn., Results: Temporal lobe morphologic parameters were correlated with the presence of visual hippocampal malrotation; the strongest association was with left temporal horn width (P < .001; adjusted OR, 10.59). Multiple morphologic parameters correlated with febrile status epilepticus, encompassing both the right and left sides. This association was statistically strongest in the right temporal lobe, whereas hippocampal malrotation was almost exclusively left-sided in this cohort. The association between temporal lobe measurements and febrile status epilepticus persisted when the analysis was restricted to cases with visually normal imaging findings without hippocampal malrotation or other visually apparent abnormalities., Conclusions: Several component morphologic features of hippocampal malrotation are independently associated with febrile status epilepticus, even when complete hippocampal malrotation is absent. Unexpectedly, this association predominantly involves the right temporal lobe. These findings suggest that a spectrum of bilateral temporal lobe anomalies are associated with febrile status epilepticus in children. Hippocampal malrotation may represent a visually apparent subset of this spectrum., (© 2016 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.)

Objective: Epileptic seizures, syncope, and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) account for over 90% of presentations with transient loss of consciousness (TLOC). The patient's history is crucial for the diagnosis, but the diagnostic value of individual semiologic features is limited. This study explores the diagnostic potential of a comprehensive questionnaire focusing on TLOC-associated symptoms., Methods: A total of 386 patients with proven epilepsy, 308 patients with proven PNES, and 371 patients with proven syncope were approached by post to recruit 100 patients in each diagnostic group. Symptoms were self-reported on an 86-item questionnaire (the Paroxysmal Event Profile [PEP]) using a 5-point Likert scale (always to never). Data were subjected to exploratory factor analysis (EFA) followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Factors were used to differentiate between diagnoses by pairwise and multinomial regression., Results: Patients with PNES reported more and more frequent TLOC-associated symptoms than those with epilepsy or syncope (p < 0.001). EFA/CFA identified a 5-factor structure based on 74/86 questionnaire items with loadings ≥0.4. Pairwise logistic regression analysis correctly classified 91% of patients with epilepsy vs those with syncope, 94% of those with PNES vs those with syncope, and 77% of those with epilepsy vs those with PNES. Multinomial logistic regression analysis yielded a similar pattern., Conclusions: Clusters of self-reported TLOC symptoms can be used to direct patients to appropriate investigation and treatment pathways for syncope on the one hand and seizures on the other, although additional information is required for a reliable distinction, especially between epilepsy and PNES., (© 2016 American Academy of Neurology.)