Academic and employment insertion as a factor related to quality of life in patients with drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Academic and employment insertion is one of the issues that most concern people with epilepsy, but little is known about its relationship with quality of life.

AIM

We aimed to analyze the effects of the academic and employment insertion on quality of life, anxiety, depression, social support, and executive functions, and the relationships among these variables in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-nine patients with drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy were classified into two groups: with academic or employment insertion (n = 25) and without insertion (n = 34) and underwent a neuropsychological evaluation.

RESULTS

Patients with insertion had a significantly better quality of life, lower trait anxiety, and higher social support, and tended to have a lower percentage of errors and higher percent conceptual level responses than those without insertion. Academic/employment insertion had indirect effects on quality of life through its relationship with global social support and trait anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide a model for understanding the quality of life in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy for an integral perspective of the patient and points out the key role of increased social support and reduced anxiety associated with academic and employment insertion to improve quality of life. These results could favor the implementation of programs that promote academic or employment reinsertion, considering the relevance of socio-emotional domains.

[Diagnostic challenges in epilepsy]

INTRODUCTION

Epileptic seizures and epilepsy are part of daily clinical practice in neurology. Yet, the number of false positive diagnoses is surprisingly high. Almost one out of every five patients treated for epilepsy does not really have this diagnosis, which is a high percentage bearing in mind the social and medical consequences that being diagnosed with epilepsy entails.

AIMS

To summarise the most important diagnostic challenges in epilepsy, to describe possible sources of diagnostic error and to offer advice on how to avoid them.

DEVELOPMENT

Epilepsy is characterised by a tendency to suffer unprovoked epileptic seizures. The greatest obstacle when it comes to diagnosing a case of epilepsy is the fact that epileptic seizures are transient phenomena that occur relatively infrequently and the physician who must carry out the diagnosis will rarely see them. Moreover, there are other clinical events, such as syncopes or non-epileptic seizures, that may be similar to epileptic seizures in appearance and, consequently, can be mistaken for them. Finally, when interpreting the two most important complementary diagnostic techniques in epileptology, the electroencephalogram and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, the most common errors must be taken into account in order to prevent mistaken diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of epilepsy is a challenge and must be based on a detailed and specific medical record. If there are any reasonable doubts, from the outset, about the diagnosis of epilepsy or if the patient does not respond well to the antiepileptic treatment, we recommend referring the patient to a specialised centre to establish a definitive diagnosis.

Unravelling the mysteries of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is the most frequent cause of premature death in epileptic patients. Most SUDEP events occur at night and frequently go unnoticed; the exact pathophysiological mechanisms of this phenomenon therefore remain undetermined. Nevertheless, most cases of SUDEP are attributed to an infrequent yet extremely severe complication of epileptic seizures.

DEVELOPMENT

We conducted a systematic literature search on PubMed. Our review article summarises scientific evidence on the classification, pathophysiological mechanisms, risk factors, biomarkers, and prevention of SUDEP. Likewise, we propose new lines of research and critically analyse findings that are relevant to clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Current knowledge suggests that SUDEP is a heterogeneous phenomenon caused by multiple factors. In most cases, however, SUDEP is thought to be due to postictal cardiorespiratory failure triggered by generalised tonic-clonic seizures and ultimately leading to cardiac arrest. The underlying pathophysiological mechanism involves multiple factors, ranging from genetic predisposition to environmental factors. Risk of SUDEP is higher in young adults with uncontrolled generalised tonic-clonic seizures. However, patients apparently at lower risk may also experience SUDEP. Current research focuses on identifying genetic and neuroimaging biomarkers that may help determine which patients are at high risk for SUDEP. Antiepileptic treatment is the only preventive measure proven effective to date. Night-time monitoring together with early resuscitation may reduce the risk of SUDEP.