Tonic and atonic seizures: What’s next-VNS or callosotomy?

Norwegian population-based study of effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the long-term efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEE) compared with epilepsy patients without intellectual disability (ID).

METHODS

Long-term outcomes from a Norwegian VNS quality registry are reported in 105 patients with DEEs (Lennox-Gastaut syndrome [LGS] n = 62; Dravet n = 16; Rett n = 9; other syndromes n = 18) were compared with 212 epilepsy patients without ID, with median follow-up of 88 and 72 months, respectively. Total seizure reduction was evaluated at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 60 months. Effect on different seizure types was evaluated at baseline and last observation carried forward (LOCF).

RESULTS

Median monthly seizure frequency at LOCF was reduced by 42.2% (p < 0.001) in patients with DEE and by 55.8% (p < 0.001) in patients without ID. In DEE patients, ≥50% seizure reduction at 6 and 24 months were 17.1% and 37.1%, respectively, and 33.5% and 48.6% for patients without ID. Seizure reduction ≥75% at 60 months occurred in 14.3% of DEE patients and 23.1% of patients without ID. Highest median reduction was for atonic seizures, most notably 64.6% for LGS patients. A better effect was seen at 2 years among DEE patients with unchanged medication compared with those with changed medication (54.5% vs. 35.6% responders, p = 0.078). More DEE patients were reported to have greater improvement in ictal or postictal severity (43.8% vs. 28.3%, p = 0.006) and alertness (62.9% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.001) than patients without ID. For both groups, use of the magnet reduced seizure severity. Hoarseness was the most common adverse effect in both groups. In addition, DEE patients were frequently reported to have sleep disturbance, general discomfort, or abdominal problems.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our data indicate that VNS is very effective for atonic seizures. Patients without ID had best overall seizure reduction, however, patients with DEE had higher retention rates probably due to other positive effects.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

DEE refers to a group of patients with severe epilepsy and intellectual disability. Many of these patients have restricted lifestyles with frequent seizures. VNS is a treatment option for patients who do not respond well to medicines, either because of insufficient effect or serious adverse effects. Our study shows that VNS is well tolerated in this patient group and leads to a reduction in all seizure types, most notably for seizures leading to fall. Many patients experience other positive effects like shorter and milder seizures, as well as improvement in alertness.

Effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation therapy in refractory hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy-induced epilepsy

Background

Epilepsy is one of the important long-term sequelae of neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) and is typically characterized by drug resistance and poor surgical outcomes. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a promising neuromodulation therapy for refractory epilepsy.

Objectives

The present study aimed to first evaluate the effectiveness of VNS in patients with refractory HIE-induced epilepsy and scrutinize potential clinical predictors.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the outcomes of VNS in all patients with refractory HIE-induced epilepsy and at least 2 years of follow-up. Subgroups were classified as responders and nonresponders according to the effectiveness of VNS (⩾50% or <50% reduction in seizure frequency). Preoperative data were analyzed to screen for potential predictors of VNS effectiveness.

Results

A total of 55 patients with refractory HIE-induced epilepsy who underwent VNS therapy were enrolled. Responders represented 56.4% of patients, and 12.7% of patients achieved seizure freedom at the last follow-up. In addition, the responder rate increased over time with rates of 23.6%, 38.2%, 50.9%, and 56.4% at the 3-, 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-ups, respectively. After multivariate analysis, neonatal seizure was identified as a negative predictor (OR: 4.640, 95% CI: 1.129-19.066), and a predominant seizure type of generalized onset was identified as a positive predictor (OR: 0.261, 95% CI: 0.078-0.873) of VNS effectiveness.

Conclusion

VNS therapy was effective in patients with refractory HIE-induced epilepsy and was well tolerated over a 2-year follow-up period. VNS therapy demonstrated better effectiveness in patients without neonatal seizures or with a predominant seizure type of generalized onset.

Corpus Callosotomy in the Modern Era: Origins, Efficacy, Technical Variations, Complications, and Indications

Corpus callosotomy is among the oldest surgeries performed for drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). First performed in 1940, various studies have since assessed its outcomes in various patient populations in addition to describing different extents of sectioning and emerging technologies (i.e. endoscopic, laser interstitial thermal therapy, and radiosurgery). In order to capture the current state and offer a reappraisal, we comprehensively review corpus callosotomy's origins, efficacy for various seizure types, technical variations, complications, and indications and compare the procedure to vagus nerve stimulation therapy which has similar indications. We consider corpus callosotomy to be a safe and efficacious procedure that should be considered by clinicians when appropriate. Furthermore, it can also play an important role in treating patients with DRE in low-to-middle-income countries where resources are limited.

One-Year Cost-Effectiveness of Callosotomy Versus Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug-Resistant Seizures in Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome: A Decision Analytic Model

Objective

Palliative epilepsy surgery via corpus callosotomy (CC) or vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is commonly employed for drug‐resistant seizures in Lennox‐Gastaut Syndrome (LGS). VNS is less effective at reducing seizures but has fewer adverse events, CC is more effective for seizure control, particularly atonic seizures, but can be associated with serious adverse events, and yet their relative cost‐effectiveness remains unknown.

Methods

To determine which option is most cost‐effective, a decision analytic model was developed to evaluate the risks and benefits of CC and VNS at 1 year based on costs in the United States. Our primary outcome measure was positive seizure outcomes, defined as >50% seizure reduction without procedural complications.

Results

CC had a 15% greater likelihood of a positive seizure outcome, but per patient costs were $68 147 more than VNS, or $451 952 per positive seizure outcome gained. One‐way sensitivity analyses demonstrate that probabilities of seizure freedom or reduction by VNS or CC and CC cost were most influential on results. When considering atonic seizures, CC had a 27% greater positive outcome likelihood than VNS, the same incremental cost, and cost $250 556 per positive seizure outcome gained.

Significance

This exploratory model suggests that VNS is more cost‐effective relative to CC at 1 year.

Effects of Vagus Nerve Stimulation following Corpus Callosotomy for Patients with Drug-Resistant Epilepsy

Objective: The effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for residual seizures after corpus callosotomy (CC) has not yet been fully investigated. We hypothesized that seizure control would be improved by VNS after CC. The purpose of this study was to compare seizure frequency between patients with implantation of a VNS generator (post-VNS group) or without VNS (non-post-VNS group) following CC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent CC between January 2009 and May 2019 in our institution. We evaluated proportions of ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency (responders) and seizure reduction rate 1 and 2 years after VNS. To investigate factors related to responders, uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed regarding age, number of anti-seizure medications (ASMs), addition of novel ASMs (levetiracetam, lacosamide or perampanel), and post-VNS or non-post-VNS status. Results: Thirteen post-VNS patients and 24 non-post-VNS patients were analyzed in this study. Responder rate at 1 year after VNS differed significantly between the post-VNS group (53.9%) and non-post-VNS group (12.5%, p = 0.017). Number of ASMs at the time of CC and post-VNS were significantly associated with responders in univariate analyses (odds ratio [OR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13–0.88, p = 0.025 and OR 8.2, 95%CI 1.6–41.6, p = 0.011, respectively), whereas age, sex, seizure frequency, and addition of novel ASMs were not. In multivariate analysis, the presence of VNS procedures after CC was the only factor favorably associated with responder status (OR 82.2, 95%CI 1.55–4355.7, p = 0.03). Conclusions: VNS therapy after CC may increase the proportion of responders independent of the addition of novel ASMs.

Atonic seizures in children: a meta-analysis comparing corpus callosotomy to vagus nerve stimulation

PURPOSE

Atonic seizures are associated with a particularly poor response to medical treatment. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of corpus callosotomy (CC) and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in the management of atonic seizures in the pediatric population.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and recommendations, focusing on atonic seizures, CC, and VNS in pediatric populations. Pertinent clinical data were extracted and analyzed. Pooled effects between groups were calculated as standardized error (SE) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). To assess for statistical significance, the Z-test was performed, using the pooled effect size (ES) and 95% CI for each intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies met the inclusion criteria, with 24 studies encompassing 425 children treated with CC and 7 studies encompassing 108 children treated with VNS. Twenty-four studies were included in a meta-analysis. There was a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of atonic seizure control in favor of CC (overall effect size (ES) 0.73, 95% CI 0.69-0.77 for CC, ES 0.4, 95% CI 0.28-0.51 for VNS, p = 0.003). There was a higher rate of complications requiring reoperation in the CC cohort (6.6% vs. 3.8%) and a 14% rate of symptomatic disconnection syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

While both techniques are safe, CC provides a much higher chance of effectively managing this morbid seizure type albeit with a higher risk of re-operation and disconnection syndrome.

Efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy in children age six and younger

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study were to examine the safety and efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for reducing seizure frequency and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in children younger than six years and to examine long-term VNS efficacy for children who receive the device at ages 1-3 and at ages 4-6.

METHODS

We conducted a 10-year retrospective analysis of VNS implantations at UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh. Relevant data were collected within 12 months of VNS implantation and at six months, one, two, and four years after VNS implantation.

RESULTS

This analysis included 99 patients ages 0-3 (n = 40) and 4-6 (n = 59) at first VNS implantation. Eighty-six patients followed up for ≥4 years. There were no significant differences between age at VNS implant (0-3 vs. 4-6) and seizure etiology or most seizure semiologies. Patients took an average of 3.01 ± 1.29 AEDs prior to VNS and 3.84 ± 1.68 AEDs at their latest follow-up. The overall response to VNS therapy (≥50% seizure reduction) at one year, two years, and four years after VNS implantation was 55%, 60%, and 52%, respectively. At two years, 59% of 0- to 3-year-old patients responded to VNS and 52% of 4- to 6-year-old patients responded to VNS. The overall major complication rate was 5.6%, consistent with VNS use for older age groups.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of VNS for children with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) younger than six. One, two, and four years after VNS implantation, 55%, 60%, and 52% of these patients, respectively, achieved ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency. The safety of VNS is also comparable with older, better studied, age groups. Based on these data, VNS therapy should be considered for children younger than six.

Efficacy of VNS for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy in Structural Brain Lesions

Background:

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been used for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy, especially in patients who are not candidates for surgical intervention. In fact, it was approved by the US FDA in 1997 as an adjunctive treatment for medically intractable epilepsy.

Objective:

In this study, we investigated the efficacy of VNS in drug-resistant epilepsy associated with structural brain lesions (SBLs).

Methods:

We retrospectively analyzed the effect of VNS on 25 patients diagnosed with intractable epilepsy-associated SBL, and compared the results to 19 patients with intractable epilepsy and normal neuroimaging. All patients underwent VNS insertion at the National Neurosciences Institute, King Fahad Medical City (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) between 2008 and 2018.

Results:

The response rate (RR) for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy-associated SBL was 24% after 3 months, 36% after 6 months, and 48% after 1 year, reaching 76% over time. The mean follow-up period was 63.3 months. For non-SBL patients, the RR was 10.5% after 3 months, 36.8% after 6 months, and 47.4% after 1 year, reaching 73.7% over time. The mean follow-up period was 59.2 months. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding RR, VNS settings, and other parameters, including anti-epileptic drug use and demographics data.

Conclusion:

VNS is strongly considered for intractable epilepsy in SBL patients, especially if they are not candidates for surgical intervention. Over time, those patients will receive increased benefits from VNS therapy.

Refractory Status Epilepticus in Genetic Epilepsy-Is Vagus Nerve Stimulation an Option?

Refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus (RSE, SRSE) are severe conditions that can have long-term neurological consequences with high morbidity and mortality rates. The usefulness of vagus nerve-stimulation (VNS) implantation during RSE has been documented by anecdotal cases and in systematic reviews; however, the use of VNS in RSE has not been widely adopted. We successfully implanted VNS in two patients with genetic epilepsy admitted to hospital for SRSE; detailed descriptions of the clinical findings and VNS parameters are provided. Our patients were implanted 25 and 58 days after status epilepticus (SE) onset, and a stable remission of SE was observed from the seventh and tenth day after VNS implantation, respectively, without change in anti-seizure medication. We used a fast ramp-up of stimulation without evident side effects. Our results support the consideration of VNS implantation as a safe and effective adjunctive treatment for SRSE.

The Present and Future of Vagus Nerve Stimulation

Epilepsy is one of the major chronic neurological diseases affecting many patients. Resection surgery is the most effective therapy for medically intractable epilepsy, but it is not feasible in all patients. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an adjunctive neuromodulation therapy that was approved in 1997 for the alleviation of seizures; however, efforts to control epilepsy by stimulating the vagus nerve have been studied for over 100 years. Although its exact mechanism is still under investigation, VNS is thought to affect various brain areas. Hence, VNS has a wide indication for various intractable epileptic syndromes and epilepsyrelated comorbidities. Moreover, recent studies have shown anti-inflammatory effects of VNS, and the indication is expanding beyond epilepsy to rheumatoid arthritis, chronic headaches, and depression. VNS yields a more than 50% reduction in seizures in approximately 60% of recipients, with an increase in reduction rates as the follow-up duration increases. The complication rate of VNS is 3–6%, and infection is the most important complication to consider. However, revision surgery was reported to be feasible and safe with appropriate measures. Recently, noninvasive VNS (nVNS) has been introduced, which can be performed transcutaneously without implantation surgery. Although more clinical trials are being conducted, nVNS can reduce the risk of infection and subsequent device failure. In conclusion, VNS has been demonstrated to be beneficial and effective in the treatment of epilepsy and various diseases, and more development is expected in the future.

Efficacy and safety of corpus callosotomy after vagal nerve stimulation in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy

OBJECTIVE Vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) and corpus callosotomy (CC) have both been shown to be of benefit in the treatment of medically refractory epilepsy. Recent case series have reviewed the efficacy of VNS in patients who have undergone CC, with encouraging results. There are few data, however, on the use of CC following VNS therapy. METHODS The records of all patients at the authors' center who underwent CC following VNS between 1998 and 2015 were reviewed. Patient baseline characteristics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS Ten patients met inclusion criteria. The median follow-up was 72 months, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months (range 12-109 months). The mean time between VNS and CC was 53.7 months. The most common reason for CC was progression of seizures after VNS. Seven patients had anterior CC, and 3 patients returned to the operating room for a completion of the procedure. All patients had a decrease in the rate of falls and drop seizures; 7 patients experienced elimination of drop seizures. Nine patients had an Engel Class III outcome, and 1 patient had a Class IV outcome. There were 3 immediate postoperative complications and 1 delayed complication. One patient developed pneumonia, 1 developed transient mutism, and 1 had persistent weakness in the nondominant foot. One patient presented with a wound infection. CONCLUSIONS The authors demonstrate that CC can help reduce seizures in patients with medically refractory epilepsy following VNS, particularly with respect to drop attacks.

Seizure outcomes in nonresective epilepsy surgery: an update

In approximately 30 % of patients with epilepsy, seizures are refractory to medical therapy, leading to significant morbidity and increased mortality. Substantial evidence has demonstrated the benefit of surgical resection in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, and in the present journal, we recently reviewed seizure outcomes in resective epilepsy surgery. However, not all patients are candidates for or amenable to open surgical resection for epilepsy. Fortunately, several nonresective surgical options are now available at various epilepsy centers, including novel therapies which have been pioneered in recent years. Ablative procedures such as stereotactic laser ablation and stereotactic radiosurgery offer minimally invasive alternatives to open surgery with relatively favorable seizure outcomes, particularly in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. For certain individuals who are not candidates for ablation or resection, palliative neuromodulation procedures such as vagus nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulation, or responsive neurostimulation may result in a significant decrease in seizure frequency and improved quality of life. Finally, disconnection procedures such as multiple subpial transections and corpus callosotomy continue to play a role in select patients with an eloquent epileptogenic zone or intractable atonic seizures, respectively. Overall, open surgical resection remains the gold standard treatment for drug-resistant epilepsy, although it is significantly underutilized. While nonresective epilepsy procedures have not replaced the need for resection, there is hope that these additional surgical options will increase the number of patients who receive treatment for this devastating disorder-particularly individuals who are not candidates for or who have failed resection.

Vagus nerve stimulation therapy for treatment-resistant epilepsy: a 15-year experience at a single institution

OBJECTIVE

Treatment-resistant epilepsy (TRE) occurs in 20-30% of patients. The goal of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in this group of patients, including adult and pediatric populations and several off-label indications.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 59 consecutive patients in whom 60 VNS devices were implanted at a single institution during a 15-year period. Patients were evaluated in the Multidisciplinary Epilepsy Committee and complete presurgical workup was performed. The series included indications not approved by the FDA, such as children under 12 years of age, pregnancy and right-sided VNS. Performing the procedure on an out-patient basis was recently adopted, minimizing hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

There were 42 adults and 17 children (14 under 12 years of age) and the mean age at implantation was 26 years. Duration of VNS therapy ranged from 6 months to 9 years. For the entire cohort, the mean percentage seizure reduction was 31.37%. Twenty patients (34.48%) were considered responders (seizure reduction ≥50%); 7 patients (12.06%) had seizure reduction of ≥75% and 2 patients had seizure control of ≥90% (3.4%). The patient in whom right-sided VNS was implanted achieved the same reduction in seizure burden and the patient who became pregnant could reduce antiepileptic drugs dosage, without complications. Side-effects were mild and there were no permanent nerve injuries. One patient died in the follow-up due to psychiatric disorders previously known.

CONCLUSIONS

VNS is a safe and effective palliative treatment for TRE patients. There are an increasing number of indications and further randomized trials would potentially expand the number of patients who may benefit from it. A multidisciplinary team is crucial for a complete preoperative evaluation and selection of the optimal candidates for the treatment.

Posterior callosotomy using a parietooccipital interhemispheric approach in the semi-prone park-bench position

A 2-stage corpus callosotomy is accepted as a palliative procedure for patients older than 16 years with, in particular, medically intractable generalized epilepsy and drop attack seizures and is preferable for a lower risk of disconnection syndrome. Although the methods by which a previously performed craniotomy can be reopened for posterior callosotomy have already been reported, posterior corpus callosotomy using a parietooccipital interhemispheric approach with the patient in a semi-prone park-bench position has not been described in the literature. Here, the authors present a surgical technique for posterior callosotomy using a parietooccipital interhemispheric approach with a semi-prone park-bench position as a second surgery. Although this procedure requires an additional skin incision in the parietooccipital region, it makes the 2-stage callosotomy safer and easier to perform because of reduced intracranial adhesion, less bleeding, and an easier approach to the splenium of the corpus callosum.

Options for pharmacoresistant epilepsy in children: when medications don't work

Medications are often first-line treatment for epilepsy in children. A detailed review of antiepileptic drugs and their application in various epilepsy syndromes is provided in the article "Antiepileptic Drugs--A Review" by Sankaraneni and Lachhwani (this issue). Here, we will focus on nonmedicinal approaches-some fairly longstanding and described since Biblical times such as the ketogenic diet while others are relatively new such as neurostimulation. Yet, others such as cannabinoids have been utilized for centuries for their medicinal properties, but we are just learning the scientific basis behind their efficacy. Families are often interested in nonmedicinal avenues of treatment, and knowledge of these options can empower a pediatrician to help families make choices that have scientific validity.

Corpus callosotomy for childhood-onset drug-resistant epilepsy unresponsive to vagus nerve stimulation

PURPOSE

Corpus callosotomy and vagus nerve stimulation are common palliative options for people with drug-resistant epilepsy when resective epilepsy surgery is not feasible. Because most of the published corpus callosotomy experience comes from a period before vagus nerve stimulation was approved and widely used, there is a paucity of data about efficacy of corpus callosotomy in patients with inadequate response to vagus nerve stimulation.

METHODS

We report seven patients who had complete corpus callosotomy after an inadequate response to vagus nerve stimulation. At the time of surgery, these patients had failed a median of six antiseizure medications, three patients also had failed a trial of ketogenic diet, and all the patients had a vagus nerve stimulation implanted for a mean duration of 2.5 years with maximal tolerated settings.

RESULTS

There was a decrease in total daily seizure frequency of 34.7% (± 94.7; median, 71.4%; interquartile range, 55.3) after corpus callosotomy at a mean follow-up of 2.6 years (± 1.4). One patient achieved complete seizure freedom and five patients had ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency. Six patients continued to have partial-onset seizures though the frequency was decreased. Drop attacks and tonic seizures stopped in all the patients.

CONCLUSION

Seizure outcomes after corpus callosotomy in our series are most likely a result of complex dynamic interaction between the natural history of epilepsy, the effect of the surgery, ongoing vagus nerve stimulation modulation, and modification in antiseizure drugs. Our study supports the clinical decision to try corpus callosotomy in patients having nonlateralizing drug-resistant epilepsy with inadequate response to vagus nerve stimulation.

Baroreceptor afferents modulate brain excitation and influence susceptibility to toxic effects of hyperbaric oxygen

Unexplained adjustments in baroreflex sensitivity occur in conjunction with exposures to potentially toxic levels of hyperbaric oxygen. To investigate this, we monitored central nervous system, autonomic and cardiovascular responses in conscious and anesthetized rats exposed to hyperbaric oxygen at 5 and 6 atmospheres absolute, respectively. We observed two contrasting phases associated with time-dependent alterations in the functional state of the arterial baroreflex. The first phase, which conferred protection against potentially neurotoxic doses of oxygen, was concurrent with an increase in baroreflex sensitivity and included decreases in cerebral blood flow, heart rate, cardiac output, and sympathetic drive. The second phase was characterized by baroreflex impairment, cerebral hyperemia, spiking on the electroencephalogram, increased sympathetic drive, parasympatholysis, and pulmonary injury. Complete arterial baroreceptor deafferentation abolished the initial protective response, whereas electrical stimulation of intact arterial baroreceptor afferents prolonged it. We concluded that increased afferent traffic attributable to arterial baroreflex activation delays the development of excessive central excitation and seizures. Baroreflex inactivation or impairment removes this protection, and seizures may follow. Finally, electrical stimulation of intact baroreceptor afferents extends the normal delay in seizure development. These findings reveal that the autonomic nervous system is a powerful determinant of susceptibility to sympathetic hyperactivation and seizures in hyperbaric oxygen and the ensuing neurogenic pulmonary injury.

Combination of corpus callosotomy and vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of refractory epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Palliative techniques such as partial corpus callosotomy (CC) and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) may be effective for adequate control of seizures in pharmacoresistant patients who are not candidates for resective surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of the combination of these two techniques in patients where the first surgery had not achieved adequate control.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 6 patients with refractory epilepsy in which both types of surgery were performed, CC and VNS. We analyzed variables such as age, sex, age at onset of epilepsy, seizure types, electroencephalogram and magnetic resonance imaging results, and number of pre- and postoperative seizures.

RESULTS

Three patients first underwent VNS and then CC, and 3 patients were treated in reverse order. All patients had some improvement after the first surgery, but they continued to experience persistent falls, so a second palliative technique was used. The mean improvement after both surgeries was 89% (90% in patients first receiving CC and 87% in patients who first underwent VNS).

CONCLUSIONS

In adequately studied patients who are not optimal candidates for resective surgery, palliative surgery is a choice. The combination of VNS and CC shows good results in our series, although the right order to perform both procedures has not been defined. These results should be confirmed in a larger group of patients.

Critical review of palliative surgical techniques for intractable epilepsy

Approximately one third of epilepsy patients are not adequately treatable by antiepileptic medication. Curative resective epilepsy surgery can be performed in only a subgroup of these pharmacoresistent patients in whom the epileptogenic focus is localizable and does not overlap with eloquent brain areas. To the remaining patients (with bilateral or multiple epileptogenic foci, with epilepsy onset in eloquent areas, or with no identifiable epileptogenic focus) palliative epilepsy surgery can be offered if they suffer from disabling seizures. Standard palliative procedures currently comprise corpus callosotomy, multiple subpial transections, and vagus nerve stimulation. New approaches such as focus distant deep brain stimulation or direct stimulation of the hippocampus have gained the most interest. Feasibility studies, small pilot studies, and, recently, larger multicenter trials showed that direct brain stimulation shall be considered a potential helpful procedure in the field of palliative surgery. Moreover, with the increasing use of stereo-EEG in invasive video-EEG monitoring, stereo-EEG-guided thermocoagulation has the potential for a promising new treatment option in patients not amenable to resective epilepsy surgery. There is no general consensus on which palliative procedure is most effective in patients with difficult-to-treat epilepsy syndromes. The decision must be based on individual factors of a given patient. This review summarizes experience with palliative approaches collected in adult and pediatric patient series over the past decades and may help to thoroughly balance beneficial effects and risks of each procedure.

Long-term outcome after callosotomy or vagus nerve stimulation in consecutive prospective cohorts of children with Lennox-Gastaut or Lennox-like syndrome and non-specific MRI findings

PURPOSE

There is currently no resective (potentially curative) surgical option that is useful in patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Palliative procedures such as callosotomy (Cx), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) or deep brain stimulation have been offered. We compared the outcomes after Cx or VNS in two consecutive prospective cohorts of patients with generalised epilepsy.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients underwent callosotomy from 2006 to 2007 (Group 1); 20 additional patients were submitted to VNS from 2008 to 2009 (Group 2). They had generalised epilepsy of the Lennox-Gastaut or Lennox-like type. They were submitted to a neurological interview and examination, interictal and ictal video-EEG, high resolution 1.5T MRI, and cognitive and quality of life evaluations. The two-year post-operative follow-up results were evaluated for each patient.

RESULTS

The final mean stimuli intensity was 3.0 mA in the Group 2 patients. Seizure-free patients accounted for 10% in Group 1 and none in Group 2. Ten and sixteen percent of the Group 1 and 2 patients, respectively, were non-responders. Improvements in attention and quality of life were noted in 85% of both Group 1 and 2 patients. Rupture of the secondary bilateral synchrony was noted in 85% of Group 1 patients; there was no EEG modification after VNS in Group 2. Both procedures were effective regarding the control of atypical absences and generalised tonic-clonic seizures. Both procedures were not effective in controlling tonic seizures. Callosotomy was very effective in reducing the frequency of atonic seizures, but VNS was ineffective. In contrast, callosotomy was not effective in reducing myoclonic seizures, whereas VNS was.

DISCUSSION

Callosotomy might be preferred as the primary treatment in children with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and no specific findings on MRI if atonic seizures prevail in the patient's clinical picture; when myoclonic seizures prevail, the same might hold true in favour of VNS. When atypical absence or generalised tonic-clonic seizures are the main concern, although both procedures carry similar effectiveness, VNS might be considered a good option as an initial approach, taking into account the adverse event profile. Patients should be advised that both procedures are not very effective in the treatment of tonic seizures.

Cost effectiveness of lacosamide in the adjunctive treatment of patients with refractory focal epilepsy in Belgium

OBJECTIVES

Lacosamide is an anti-epileptic drug, indicated as adjunctive therapy for patients with focal seizures with or without secondary generalization. This study aims to assess the cost effectiveness of standard anti-epileptic drug therapy plus lacosamide 300 mg/day compared with standard therapy alone from the perspective of the Belgian healthcare payer.

METHODS

The treatment pathway of a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients over 2 years was simulated using a decision tree. Data about health state probabilities, seizure frequency and utility values were taken from lacosamide trials or from the literature. Effectiveness measures included the number of seizures avoided and the number of quality-adjusted life-years gained. Unit costs were taken from national references. Resource use was estimated by a panel of eight neurologists with extensive experience in epilepsy. The price year was 2008. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Over a 24-month period, standard anti-epileptic drug therapy plus lacosamide led to a reduction of seven seizures, an increase of 0.038 quality-adjusted life-years and a cost decrease of &U20AC;3619 per patient compared with standard therapy alone. Using a willingness to pay of &U20AC;30 000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the net monetary benefit of standard anti-epileptic drug therapy plus lacosamide amounted to &U20AC;4754. The probability of standard anti-epileptic drug therapy plus lacosamide being cost effective was 97.3%, 99.8%, 99.9% and 100% at 6, 12 , 18 and 24 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In patients with difficult-to-treat epilepsy, standard anti-epileptic drug therapy plus lacosamide appears to be a cost-effective option in Belgium.

Lacosamide as adjunctive therapy for partial-onset epileptic seizures: a review of the clinical and economic literature

OBJECTIVE

This article provides a short but comprehensive pharmacotherapeutic update of adjunctive therapy with lacosamide for partial-onset seizures in adult patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

PubMed, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EconLit were searched from January 1999 to September 2010. Studies evaluating intravenous lacosamide were excluded because this article focuses on chronic adjunctive therapy.

RESULTS

Three randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have investigated the efficacy of lacosamide in 1300 adults with epilepsy. The median percent reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline to maintenance was 18.4% for placebo, 33.3% for lacosamide 200 mg/day (p < 0.01), 36.8% for 400 mg/day (p < 0.001), 39.4% for 600 mg/day. The percentage of patients attaining a seizure frequency reduction of ≥50% was 22.6% with placebo, 34.1% with lacosamide 200 mg/day (p < 0.05), 39.7% with lacosamide 400 mg/day (p < 0.001), 39.6% with lacosamide 600 mg/day. Three open-label extension studies showed that long-term treatment with lacosamide produced sustained efficacy in and was well-tolerated by patients. Three economic evaluations used a similar design to determine the cost effectiveness of lacosamide from the healthcare payer perspective in Sweden, Finland and Belgium. These studies showed that standard anti-epileptic drug therapy plus lacosamide is likely to constitute a cost-effective alternative. The budget impact of introducing lacosamide is likely to be limited.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on lacosamide was limited and studies suffered from a number of methodological limitations. Lacosamide appears to be a safe, efficacious and cost-effective adjunctive therapy for partial-onset epileptic seizures in adult patients. However, these results need to be validated by studies that explore the impact of lacosamide in real-life clinical practice.

Treatment of epilepsy in children with developmental disabilities

Children with developmental disabilities are at increased risk for epilepsy with a prevalence rate higher than the general population. Some of the more common developmental disorders in childhood and the features of epilepsy in these conditions are discussed. Specifically, autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation, and attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder are reviewed. Ideal treatment for developmentally-disabled children with epilepsy entails maximal seizure control without any significant adverse effects from the anti-epileptic drugs and good quality of life. Antiepileptic drugs' cognitive and behavioral adverse effects tend to occur more frequently in these children. Careful selection of the appropriate medication and close monitoring for drug adverse effects is important. The specific adverse effects of the older and newer antiepileptic drugs are also reviewed.

When should corpus callosotomy be offered as palliative therapy?

Long-Term Seizure Outcome after Corpus Callosotomy: A Retrospective Analysis of 95 Patients. Tanriverdi T, Olivier A, Poulin N, Andermann F, Dubeau F. J Neurosurg 2009;110(2):332–342. OBJECT: The authors report long-term follow-up seizure outcome in patients who underwent corpus callosotomy during the period 1981–2001 at the Montreal Neurological Institute. METHODS: The records of 95 patients with a minimum follow-up of 5 years (mean 17.2 years) were retrospectively evaluated with respect to seizure, medication outcomes, and prognostic factors on seizure outcome. RESULTS: All patients had more than one type of seizure, most frequently drop attacks and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. The most disabling seizure type was drop attacks, followed by generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Improvement was noted in several seizure types and was most likely for generalized tonic–clonic seizures (77.3%) and drop attacks (77.2%). Simple partial, generalized tonic, and myoclonic seizures also benefited from anterior callosotomy. The extent of the callosal section was correlated with favorable seizure outcome. The complications were mild and transient and no death was seen. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that anterior callosotomy is an effective treatment in intractable generalized seizures that are not amenable to focal resection. When considering this procedure, the treating physician must thoroughly assess the expected benefits, limitations, likelihood of residual seizures, and the risks, and explain them to the patient, his or her family, and other caregivers.