Analysis of rare copy number variation in absence epilepsies.

OBJECTIVE: To identify shared genes and pathways between common absence epilepsy (AE) subtypes (childhood absence epilepsy [CAE], juvenile absence epilepsy [JAE], and unclassified absence epilepsy [UAE]) that may indicate common mechanisms for absence seizure generation and potentially a diagnostic continuum. METHODS: We used high-density single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays to analyze genome-wide rare copy number variation (CNV) in a cohort of 144 children with AEs (95 CAE, 26 UAE, and 23 JAE). RESULTS: We identified CNVs that are known risk factors for AE in 4 patients, including 3x 15q11.2 deletion. We also expanded the phenotype at 4 regions more commonly identified in other neurodevelopmental disorders: 1p36.33 duplication, 1q21.1 deletion, 22q11.2 duplication, and Xp22.31 deletion and duplication. Fifteen patients (10.5%) were found to carry rare CNVs that disrupt genes associated with neuronal development and function (8 CAE, 2 JAE, and 5 UAE). Four categories of protein are each disrupted by several CNVs: (1) synaptic vesicle membrane or vesicle endocytosis, (2) synaptic cell adhesion, (3) synapse organization and motility via actin, and (4) gap junctions. CNVs within these categories are shared across the AE subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results have reinforced the complex and heterogeneous nature of the AEs and their potential for shared genetic mechanisms and have highlighted several pathways that may be important in epileptogenesis of absence seizures

Cortical excitability correlates with seizure control and epilepsy duration in chronic epilepsy

OBJECTIVE: Cortical excitability differs between treatment responders and nonresponders in new‐onset epilepsy. Moreover, during the first 3 years of epilepsy, cortical excitability becomes more abnormal in nonresponders but normalizes in responders. Here, we study chronic active epilepsy, to examine whether cortical excitability continues to evolve over time, in association with epilepsy duration and treatment response. METHODS: We studied 28 normal subjects, 28 patients with moderately controlled epilepsy (≤4 seizures per year) and 40 patients with poorly controlled epilepsy (≥20 or more seizures per year). Resting motor threshold (RMT), active motor threshold (AMT), short‐interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF) and cortical silent period (CSP) were measured, using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Disease and treatment covariates were collected (age at onset of epilepsy, epilepsy duration, number of drugs prescribed, total drug load, sodium channel drug load). RESULTS: RMT and AMT were higher in patients than in normal subjects; RMT and AMT were higher in poorly controlled than moderately controlled patients. ICF at 12 msec and 15 msec were lower in poorly controlled patients than in normal subjects. Long‐interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) at 50 msec was higher in poorly controlled compared to moderately controlled patients. These differences were not explained by antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment or duration of epilepsy. RMT and AMT increased with duration in the poorly controlled group, but did not increase with duration in the moderately controlled group. INTERPRETATION: Cortical excitability differs markedly between moderately controlled and poorly controlled patients with chronic epilepsy, not explained by disease or treatment variables. Moreover, the evolution of cortical excitability over time differs, becoming more abnormal in the poorly controlled group

An alternative surgical approach to subclavian and innominate stenosis: a case series

We report three cases of symptomatic stenosis of the great vessels or supra-aortic trunks successfully treated surgically with aorto-subclavian and aorto-innominate bypass. Two were performed via manubriotomy and a third case via standard median sternotomy because of concomitant coronary revascularisation. There was complete symptomatic relief on follow-up, and radiological imaging confirmed good flow in the grafts and post-stenotic arteries

The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is not appropriate for withholding surgery in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis: a retrospective cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is a widely used risk assessment tool in patients with severe aortic stenosis to determine operability and to select patients for alternative therapies such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of the EuroSCORE in predicting mortality following aortic valve replacement (AVR).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The logistic EuroSCORE was determined for all consecutive patients that underwent conventional AVR between 1995 and 2005 at our institution. Provincial Vital Statistics were used to determine all-cause mortality. The accuracy of the prognostic risk prediction provided by logistic EuroSCORE was assessed by comparing observed and expected operative mortality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>During the study period, a total of 1,421 patients underwent AVR including 237 patients (16.7%) that had a logistic EuroSCORE > 20. Among these patients, the mean predicted operative mortality was 38.7% (SD = 18.1). The actual mortality of these patients was significantly lower than that predicted by EuroSCORE (11.4% vs. 38.7%, observed/expected ratio 0.29, 95% CI 0.15–0.52, P < 0.05). The EuroSCORE overestimated mortality within all strata of predicted risk. Although medium-term mortality is significantly higher among patients with EuroSCORE > 20 (log rank P = 0.0001), approximately 60% are alive at five years.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Actual operative mortality in patients undergoing AVR is significantly lower than that predicted by the logistic EuroSCORE. Additionally, medium-term survival following AVR is acceptable in high-risk patients with EuroSCORE > 20. More accurate risk prediction models are needed for risk-stratifying patients with severe aortic stenosis.</p

Translation of mouse model to human gives insights into periodontitis etiology

To suggest candidate genes involved in periodontitis, we combined gene expression data of periodontal biopsies from Collaborative Cross (CC) mouse lines, with previous reported quantitative trait loci (QTL) in mouse and with human genome-wide association studies (GWAS) associated with periodontitis. Periodontal samples from two susceptible, two resistant and two lines that showed bone formation after periodontal infection were collected during infection and naïve status. Differential expressed genes (DEGs) were analyzed in a case-control and case-only design. After infection, eleven protein-coding genes were significantly stronger expressed in resistant CC lines compared to susceptible ones. Of these, the most upregulated genes were MMP20 (P = 0.001), RSPO4 (P = 0.032), CALB1 (P = 1.06×10-4), and AMTN (P = 0.05). In addition, human orthologous of candidate genes were tested for their association in a case-controls samples of aggressive (AgP) and chronic (CP) periodontitis (5,095 cases, 9,908 controls). In this analysis, variants at two loci, TTLL11/PTGS1 (rs9695213, P = 5.77×10-5) and RNASE2 (rs2771342, P = 2.84×10-5) suggested association with both AgP and CP. In the association analysis with AgP only, the most significant associations were located at the HLA loci HLA-DQH1 (rs9271850, P = 2.52×10-14) and HLA-DPA1 (rs17214512, P = 5.14×10-5). This study demonstrates the utility of the CC RIL populations as a suitable model to investigate the mechanism of periodontal disease

Cognitive behavioural therapy for adults with dissociative seizures (CODES): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Dissociative seizures are paroxysmal events resembling epilepsy or syncope with characteristic features that allow them to be distinguished from other medical conditions. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) plus standardised medical care with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of dissociative seizure frequency. METHODS: In this pragmatic, parallel-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial, we initially recruited participants at 27 neurology or epilepsy services in England, Scotland, and Wales. Adults (≥18 years) who had dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous 12 months were subsequently randomly assigned (1:1) from 17 liaison or neuropsychiatry services following psychiatric assessment, to receive standardised medical care or CBT plus standardised medical care, using a web-based system. Randomisation was stratified by neuropsychiatry or liaison psychiatry recruitment site. The trial manager, chief investigator, all treating clinicians, and patients were aware of treatment allocation, but outcome data collectors and trial statisticians were unaware of treatment allocation. Patients were followed up 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was monthly dissociative seizure frequency (ie, frequency in the previous 4 weeks) assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes assessed at 12 months were: seizure severity (intensity) and bothersomeness; longest period of seizure freedom in the previous 6 months; complete seizure freedom in the previous 3 months; a greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency relative to baseline; changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others); health-related quality of life; psychosocial functioning; psychiatric symptoms, psychological distress, and somatic symptom burden; and clinical impression of improvement and satisfaction. p values and statistical significance for outcomes were reported without correction for multiple comparisons as per our protocol. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the intention-to-treat population with multiple imputation for missing observations. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN05681227, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02325544. FINDINGS: Between Jan 16, 2015, and May 31, 2017, we randomly assigned 368 patients to receive CBT plus standardised medical care (n=186) or standardised medical care alone (n=182); of whom 313 had primary outcome data at 12 months (156 [84%] of 186 patients in the CBT plus standardised medical care group and 157 [86%] of 182 patients in the standardised medical care group). At 12 months, no significant difference in monthly dissociative seizure frequency was identified between the groups (median 4 seizures [IQR 0-20] in the CBT plus standardised medical care group vs 7 seizures [1-35] in the standardised medical care group; estimated incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·56-1·09]; p=0·144). Dissociative seizures were rated as less bothersome in the CBT plus standardised medical care group than the standardised medical care group (estimated mean difference -0·53 [95% CI -0·97 to -0·08]; p=0·020). The CBT plus standardised medical care group had a longer period of dissociative seizure freedom in the previous 6 months (estimated IRR 1·64 [95% CI 1·22 to 2·20]; p=0·001), reported better health-related quality of life on the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions-5 Level Health Today visual analogue scale (estimated mean difference 6·16 [95% CI 1·48 to 10·84]; p=0·010), less impairment in psychosocial functioning on the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (estimated mean difference -4·12 [95% CI -6·35 to -1·89]; p<0·001), less overall psychological distress than the standardised medical care group on the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-10 scale (estimated mean difference -1·65 [95% CI -2·96 to -0·35]; p=0·013), and fewer somatic symptoms on the modified Patient Health Questionnaire-15 scale (estimated mean difference -1·67 [95% CI -2·90 to -0·44]; p=0·008). Clinical improvement at 12 months was greater in the CBT plus standardised medical care group than the standardised medical care alone group as reported by patients (estimated mean difference 0·66 [95% CI 0·26 to 1·04]; p=0·001) and by clinicians (estimated mean difference 0·47 [95% CI 0·21 to 0·73]; p<0·001), and the CBT plus standardised medical care group had greater satisfaction with treatment than did the standardised medical care group (estimated mean difference 0·90 [95% CI 0·48 to 1·31]; p<0·001). No significant differences in patient-reported seizure severity (estimated mean difference -0·11 [95% CI -0·50 to 0·29]; p=0·593) or seizure freedom in the last 3 months of the study (estimated odds ratio [OR] 1·77 [95% CI 0·93 to 3·37]; p=0·083) were identified between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were identified in the proportion of patients who had a more than 50% reduction in dissociative seizure frequency compared with baseline (OR 1·27 [95% CI 0·80 to 2·02]; p=0·313). Additionally, the 12-item Short Form survey-version 2 scores (estimated mean difference for the Physical Component Summary score 1·78 [95% CI -0·37 to 3·92]; p=0·105; estimated mean difference for the Mental Component Summary score 2·22 [95% CI -0·30 to 4·75]; p=0·084), the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 scale score (estimated mean difference -1·09 [95% CI -2·27 to 0·09]; p=0·069), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scale depression score (estimated mean difference -1·10 [95% CI -2·41 to 0·21]; p=0·099) did not differ significantly between groups. Changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others) could not be assessed due to insufficient data. During the 12-month period, the number of adverse events was similar between the groups: 57 (31%) of 186 participants in the CBT plus standardised medical care group reported 97 adverse events and 53 (29%) of 182 participants in the standardised medical care group reported 79 adverse events. INTERPRETATION: CBT plus standardised medical care had no statistically significant advantage compared with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of monthly seizures. However, improvements were observed in a number of clinically relevant secondary outcomes following CBT plus standardised medical care when compared with standardised medical care alone. Thus, adults with dissociative seizures might benefit from the addition of dissociative seizure-specific CBT to specialist care from neurologists and psychiatrists. Future work is needed to identify patients who would benefit most from a dissociative seizure-specific CBT approach. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment programme