Is wearing a face mask safe for people with epilepsy?

Since December 2019, the world has been experiencing a catastrophic pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV2. This virus primarily targets the human respiratory system. Available information suggests that people with epilepsy (PWE) are not at higher risk of being infected by the virus, nor of more severe COVID-19 manifestations, as a result of the epilepsy alone. However, COVID-19 is a serious disease that currently has no effective treatment or vaccine. A face mask is probably effective in preventing the spread of a respiratory pathogen, at least to some extent. So, should we recommend wearing a face mask to all during a pandemic of respiratory infectious disease (e.g., COVID-19) without any precautions or exemptions? While concrete evidence is lacking, if we consider that wearing a face mask may simulate hyperventilation, at least to some extent, we would probably avoid recommending this practice indiscriminately to all PWE. On the other hand, in the absence of any proven treatment or vaccine to combat COVID-19, prevention is the best available strategy and it is probably not reasonable to suggest avoid wearing face masks in PWE under any circumstances. Logically, PWE do not need to wear a face mask most of the time, as long as there is no close contact with others, especially during intense physical activities such as exercise. To the contrary, it is probably more advantageous to wear a face mask in crowded locations, with intermittent breaks in safe locations, away from others

Novel therapies for epilepsy in the pipeline

Despite the availability of many antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) (old and newly developed) and, as recently suggested, their optimization in the treatment of patients with uncontrolled seizures, more than 30% of patients with epilepsy continue to experience seizures and have drug-resistant epilepsy; the management of these patients represents a real challenge for epileptologists and researchers. Resective surgery with the best rates of seizure control is not an option for all of them; therefore, research and discovery of new methods of treating resistant epilepsy are of extreme importance. In this article, we will discuss some innovative approaches, such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp) inhibitors, gene therapy, stem cell therapy, traditional and novel antiepileptic devices, precision medicine, as well as therapeutic advances in epileptic encephalopathy in children; these treatment modalities open up new horizons for the treatment of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy

Dramatic outcomes in epilepsy: depression, suicide, injuries, and mortality

In this narrative review, we will discuss some of the significant risks and dramatic consequences that are associated with epilepsy: depression, suicide, seizure-related injuries, and mortality, both in adults and in children. Considering the high prevalence of depression among people with epilepsy (PWE), routine and periodic screening of all PWE for early detection and appropriate management of depression is recommended. PWE should be screened for suicidal ideation regularly and when needed, patients should be referred for a psychiatric evaluation and treatment. When starting an antiepileptic drug (AED) or switching from one to another AED, patients should be advised to report to their treating physician any change in their mood and existence of suicidal ideation. The risk of injuries for the general epilepsy population is increased only moderately. The risk is higher in selected populations attending epilepsy clinics and referral centers. This being said, there are PWE that may suffer frequent, severe, and sometimes even life-threatening seizure-related injuries. The most obvious way to reduce risk is to strive for improved seizure control. Finally, PWE have a 2–3 times higher mortality rate than the general population. Deaths in PWE may relate to the underlying cause of epilepsy, to seizures (including sudden unexpected death in epilepsy [SUDEP] and seizure related injuries) and to status epilepticus, as well as to other conditions that do not appear directly related to epilepsy. Improving seizure control and patient education may be the most important measures to reduce epilepsy related mortality in general and SUDEP in particular

Dysembryoplastic neuroepithelial tumor and probable sudden unexplained death in epilepsy: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>This is the first report of the case of a patient with a natural history of dysembryoplastic neuroepithelial tumor associated with probable sudden unexplained death in epilepsy. These tumors are benign, arising within the supratentorial cortex. Over 100 cases have been reported in the literature since the first description by Daumas-Duport in 1988.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 24- year-old Caucasian woman had a long period of intractable complex partial seizures, sometimes with tonic-clonic generalization and neuropsychological abnormalities. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a cortico-subcortical parietal tumor with all the characteristics of these types of tumors. After 14 years of evolution, our patient died suddenly during sleep.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of probable sudden unexplained death in symptomatic epilepsy due to dysembryoplastic neuroepithelial tumor with natural history. Early and complete excision, with functional studies before and during the surgery, leads to better control of seizures, avoiding neuropsychological changes and the risk of death. Patients with refractory epilepsy should be evaluated for any sleep disorders and should have complete cardiology assessments including electrocardiographic evaluation of cardiac rhythm disturbances.</p

Epilepsy care during the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the care of all patients around the world. The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) COVID-19 and Telemedicine Task Forces examined, through surveys to people with epilepsy (PWE), caregivers, and health care professionals, how the pandemic has affected the well-being, care, and services for PWE. The ILAE included a link on their website whereby PWE and/or their caregivers could fill out a survey (in 11 languages) about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including access to health services and impact on mental health, including the 6-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. An anonymous link was also provided whereby health care providers could report cases of new-onset seizures or an exacerbation of seizures in the context of COVID-19. Finally, a separate questionnaire aimed at exploring the utilization of telehealth by health care professionals since the pandemic began was available on the ILAE website and also disseminated to its members. Seventeen case reports were received; data were limited and therefore no firm conclusions could be drawn. Of 590 respondents to the well-being survey (422 PWE, 166 caregivers), 22.8% PWE and 27.5% caregivers reported an increase in seizure frequency, with difficulty in accessing medication and health care professionals reported as barriers to care. Of all respondents, 57.1% PWE and 21.5% caregivers had severe psychological distress (k score >13), which was significantly higher among PWE than caregivers (p<0.01). An increase in telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic was reported by health care professionals, with 40% of consultations conducted by this method. Although 74.9% of health care providers thought that this impacted positively, barriers to care were also identified. As we move forward, there is a need to ensure ongoing support and care for PWE to prevent a parallel pandemic of unmet health care needs

Outcome measurement in functional neurological disorder: a systematic review and recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify existing outcome measures for functional neurological disorder (FND), to inform the development of recommendations and to guide future research on FND outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify existing FND-specific outcome measures and the most common measurement domains and measures in previous treatment studies. Searches of Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were conducted between January 1965 and June 2019. The findings were discussed during two international meetings of the FND-Core Outcome Measures group. RESULTS: Five FND-specific measures were identified-three clinician-rated and two patient-rated-but their measurement properties have not been rigorously evaluated. No single measure was identified for use across the range of FND symptoms in adults. Across randomised controlled trials (k=40) and observational treatment studies (k=40), outcome measures most often assessed core FND symptom change. Other domains measured commonly were additional physical and psychological symptoms, life impact (ie, quality of life, disability and general functioning) and health economics/cost-utility (eg, healthcare resource use and quality-adjusted life years). CONCLUSIONS: There are few well-validated FND-specific outcome measures. Thus, at present, we recommend that existing outcome measures, known to be reliable, valid and responsive in FND or closely related populations, are used to capture key outcome domains. Increased consistency in outcome measurement will facilitate comparison of treatment effects across FND symptom types and treatment modalities. Future work needs to more rigorously validate outcome measures used in this population

Packages of Care for Epilepsy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

In the second in a series of six articles on packages of care for mental health disorders in low- and middle-income countries, Caroline Mbuba and Charles Newton discuss treatment for epilepsy

Global, regional, and national mortality among young people aged 10–24 years, 1950–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Summary: Background Documentation of patterns and long-term trends in mortality in young people, which reflect huge changes in demographic and social determinants of adolescent health, enables identification of global investment priorities for this age group. We aimed to analyse data on the number of deaths, years of life lost, and mortality rates by sex and age group in people aged 10–24 years in 204 countries and territories from 1950 to 2019 by use of estimates from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019. Methods We report trends in estimated total numbers of deaths and mortality rate per 100 000 population in young people aged 10–24 years by age group (10–14 years, 15–19 years, and 20–24 years) and sex in 204 countries and territories between 1950 and 2019 for all causes, and between 1980 and 2019 by cause of death. We analyse variation in outcomes by region, age group, and sex, and compare annual rate of change in mortality in young people aged 10–24 years with that in children aged 0–9 years from 1990 to 2019. We then analyse the association between mortality in people aged 10–24 years and socioeconomic development using the GBD Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite measure based on average national educational attainment in people older than 15 years, total fertility rate in people younger than 25 years, and income per capita. We assess the association between SDI and all-cause mortality in 2019, and analyse the ratio of observed to expected mortality by SDI using the most recent available data release (2017). Findings In 2019 there were 1·49 million deaths (95% uncertainty interval 1·39–1·59) worldwide in people aged 10–24 years, of which 61% occurred in males. 32·7% of all adolescent deaths were due to transport injuries, unintentional injuries, or interpersonal violence and conflict; 32·1% were due to communicable, nutritional, or maternal causes; 27·0% were due to non-communicable diseases; and 8·2% were due to self-harm. Since 1950, deaths in this age group decreased by 30·0% in females and 15·3% in males, and sex-based differences in mortality rate have widened in most regions of the world. Geographical variation has also increased, particularly in people aged 10–14 years. Since 1980, communicable and maternal causes of death have decreased sharply as a proportion of total deaths in most GBD super-regions, but remain some of the most common causes in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia, where more than half of all adolescent deaths occur. Annual percentage decrease in all-cause mortality rate since 1990 in adolescents aged 15–19 years was 1·3% in males and 1·6% in females, almost half that of males aged 1–4 years (2·4%), and around a third less than in females aged 1–4 years (2·5%). The proportion of global deaths in people aged 0–24 years that occurred in people aged 10–24 years more than doubled between 1950 and 2019, from 9·5% to 21·6%. Interpretation Variation in adolescent mortality between countries and by sex is widening, driven by poor progress in reducing deaths in males and older adolescents. Improving global adolescent mortality will require action to address the specific vulnerabilities of this age group, which are being overlooked. Furthermore, indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to jeopardise efforts to improve health outcomes including mortality in young people aged 10–24 years. There is an urgent need to respond to the changing global burden of adolescent mortality, address inequities where they occur, and improve the availability and quality of primary mortality data in this age group