Olfactory stimulation induces delayed responses in epilepsy

Precipitation and inhibition of seizures and epileptic discharges by sensory stimuli are receiving increasing attention because they provide insight into natural seizure generation in human epilepsies and can identify potential nonpharmacological therapies. We aimed to investigate modulation (provocation or inhibition) of epileptiform discharges (EDs) in mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) versus idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) by olfactory stimulation (OS) compared with standard provocation methods. The underlying hypothesis was that any response would be more likely to occur in MTLE, considering the anatomical connections of the temporal lobe to the olfactory system. This multicenter, international study recruited patients with either MTLE or IGE who were systematically compared for responses to OS using an EEG/video-EEG protocol including a 30-min baseline, twice 3-min olfactory stimulation with ylang-ylang, hyperventilation, and intermittent photic stimulation. The 95% confidence interval (CI) for the baseline EDs in each patient was calculated, and modulation was assumed when the number of EDs during any 3-min test period was outside this CI. A total of 134 subjects (55 with MTLE, 53 with IGE, and 26 healthy controls) were included. Epileptiform discharges were inhibited during OS in about half the patients with both MILE and IGE, whereas following OS, provocation was seen in 29.1% of patients with MILE and inhibition in 28.3% of patients with IGE. Olfactory stimulation was less provocative than standard activation methods. The frequent subclinical modulation of epileptic activity in both MTLE and IGE is in striking contrast with the rarity of reports of olfactory seizure precipitation and arrest. Inhibition during OS can be explained by nonspecific arousal. The delayed responses seem to be related to processing of olfactory stimuli in the temporal lobe, thalamus, and frontal cortex. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Perceptions of Modulatory Factors in Migraine and Epilepsy: A Multicenter Study

© Copyright © 2021 Ur Özçelik, Lin, Mameniškienè, Sauter Dalbem, Siqueira, Samaitienė, Vega Zeissig, Fonseca, Mazini Alves, dos Santos Lunardi, de Queiroz, Zubavičiūtė, Wolf and Baykan.Background: Migraine and epilepsy are both common episodic disorders, typically precipitated or inhibited by some modulatory factors (MFs). Objective: To assess the self-perception of MFs in patients with migraine (PWM) compared to patients with epilepsy (PWE) with a standardized protocol in different countries. Methods: Transcultural multicenter comparative cross-sectional study. All consecutive patients who fulfilled the ICHD-3 criteria for migraine and ILAE's criteria for epilepsy, with at least 1 year of follow-up were interviewed with a semi-structured questionnaire on clinical and epidemiological data and were asked to identify all experienced MFs from a provided list. Results: A total of 608 individuals were surveyed at five university referral centers in Brazil, Guatemala, Lithuania and Turkey. Two hundred and nineteen (91.6%) PWM and 305 (82.7%) PWE identified attack precipitating factors (PFs; p < 0.001). The most frequent three PFs reported by epilepsy patients were: “lack of sleep” (56.6%), “emotional stress” (55.3%), “negative feelings” (53.9%), while among migraine patients “emotional stress” (81.6%), “lack of sleep” (77.8%), “negative feelings” (75.7%) were cited. Inhibitory factors (IFs) for the episodes were reported by 68 (28.5%) PWM and 116 (31.4%) PWE. “Darkness” was the most common one, described by 35.6% of PWM whereas “positive feelings” reported by 10.6% of PWE. Most MFs are concordant across the countries but some transcultural differences were noted. Conclusion: The MFs of migraine and epilepsy attacks and their varying frequencies according to different countries were investigated with the same standardized questionnaire, for the first time. MFs were recognized very often in both migraine and epilepsy cohorts, but in distinct disease-specific prevalence, being more frequent in migraine. Recognition of self-perceived MFs may be helpful for the management of both illnesses

Standardized Computer-based Organized Reporting of EEG: SCORE

The electroencephalography (EEG) signal has a high complexity, and the process of extracting clinically relevant features is achieved by visual analysis of the recordings. The interobserver agreement in EEG interpretation is only moderate. This is partly due to the method of reporting the findings in free-text format. The purpose of our endeavor was to create a computer-based system for EEG assessment and reporting, where the physicians would construct the reports by choosing from predefined elements for each relevant EEG feature, as well as the clinical phenomena (for video-EEG recordings). A working group of EEG experts took part in consensus workshops in Dianalund, Denmark, in 2010 and 2011. The faculty was approved by the Commission on European Affairs of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). The working group produced a consensus proposal that went through a pan-European review process, organized by the European Chapter of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. The Standardised Computer-based Organised Reporting of EEG (SCORE) software was constructed based on the terms and features of the consensus statement and it was tested in the clinical practice. The main elements of SCORE are the following: personal data of the patient, referral data, recording conditions, modulators, background activity, drowsiness and sleep, interictal findings, episodes (clinical or subclinical events), physiologic patterns, patterns of uncertain significance, artifacts, polygraphic channels, and diagnostic significance. The following specific aspects of the neonatal EEGs are scored: alertness, temporal organization, and spatial organization. For each EEG finding, relevant features are scored using predefined terms. Definitions are provided for all EEG terms and features. SCORE can potentially improve the quality of EEG assessment and reporting; it will help incorporate the results of computer-assisted analysis into the report, it will make possible the build-up of a multinational database, and it will help in training young neurophysiologists

The provision of epilepsy care across Europe 2017:a 17-year follow-up survey

\u3cp\u3eObjective: To assess the resources available in the provision of epilepsy care across Europe and the developments since the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) survey published in 2003 (data collected in 2000). Methods: An updated online version of the European Epilepsy Services Inventory was distributed to all European chapters of the ILAE (N = 47) and responses were obtained from 33 chapters (response rate 70%). To assess trends and allow comparisons with the survey published in 2003, the responding countries were divided into 4 groups (Western, Central, Southern, and Eastern). Responses from European Union (EU) member states are reported as a subgroup (N = 23), since the current survey is a part of the EU-funded European Study on the Burden and Care of Epilepsy (ESBACE, www.esbace.eu). Results: The total number of physicians involved in epilepsy care had increased since 2000, with the largest increase seen for neurologists. The gap between the best- and the least-provided areas with regard to the competence of the providers had diminished. However, the density of comprehensive multidisciplinary epilepsy teams had not changed to any greater degree. The main problems reported by the chapters were to a large extent the same as in 2000 and included lack of specialists and specialist care, lack or underuse of epilepsy surgery, and problems regarding financing and resource allocation. Several chapters also highlighted problems with healthcare structure and organization. Significance: Although there have been some improvements concerning the availability of care for people with epilepsy in Europe over the last 17 years, there are still a number of problem areas with little improvement or where there are important regional differences.\u3c/p\u3

Standardized computer-based organized reporting of EEG : SCORE - Second version

Standardized terminology for computer-based assessment and reporting of EEG has been previously developed in Europe. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology established a taskforce in 2013 to develop this further, and to reach international consensus. This work resulted in the second, revised version of SCORE (Standardized Computer-based Organized Reporting of EEG), which is presented in this paper. The revised terminology was implemented in a software package (SCORE EEG), which was tested in clinical practice on 12,160 EEG recordings. Standardized terms implemented in SCORE are used to report the features of clinical relevance, extracted while assessing the EEGs. Selection of the terms is context sensitive: initial choices determine the subsequently presented sets of additional choices. This process automatically generates a report and feeds these features into a database. In the end, the diagnostic significance is scored, using a standardized list of terms. SCORE has specific modules for scoring seizures (including seizure semiology and ictal EEG patterns), neonatal recordings (including features specific for this age group), and for Critical Care EEG Terminology. SCORE is a useful clinical tool, with potential impact on clinical care, quality assurance, data-sharing, research and education

Current use of imaging and electromagnetic source localization procedures in epilepsy surgery centers across Europe

OBJECTIVE: In 2014 the European Union-funded E-PILEPSY project was launched to improve awareness of, and accessibility to, epilepsy surgery across Europe. We aimed to investigate the current use of neuroimaging, electromagnetic source localization, and imaging postprocessing procedures in participating centers. METHODS: A survey on the clinical use of imaging, electromagnetic source localization, and postprocessing methods in epilepsy surgery candidates was distributed among the 25 centers of the consortium. A descriptive analysis was performed, and results were compared to existing guidelines and recommendations. RESULTS: Response rate was 96%. Standard epilepsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols are acquired at 3 Tesla by 15 centers and at 1.5 Tesla by 9 centers. Three centers perform 3T MRI only if indicated. Twenty-six different MRI sequences were reported. Six centers follow all guideline-recommended MRI sequences with the proposed slice orientation and slice thickness or voxel size. Additional sequences are used by 22 centers. MRI postprocessing methods are used in 16 centers. Interictal positron emission tomography (PET) is available in 22 centers; all using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). Seventeen centers perform PET postprocessing. Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is used by 19 centers, of which 15 perform postprocessing. Four centers perform neither PET nor SPECT in children. Seven centers apply magnetoencephalography (MEG) source localization, and nine apply electroencephalography (EEG) source localization. Fourteen combinations of inverse methods and volume conduction models are used. SIGNIFICANCE: We report a large variation in the presurgical diagnostic workup among epilepsy surgery centers across Europe. This diversity underscores the need for high-quality systematic reviews, evidence-based recommendations, and harmonization of available diagnostic presurgical methods

Current use of imaging and electromagnetic source localization procedures in epilepsy surgery centers across Europe

OBJECTIVE: In 2014 the European Union-funded E-PILEPSY project was launched to improve awareness of, and accessibility to, epilepsy surgery across Europe. We aimed to investigate the current use of neuroimaging, electromagnetic source localization, and imaging postprocessing procedures in participating centers. METHODS: A survey on the clinical use of imaging, electromagnetic source localization, and postprocessing methods in epilepsy surgery candidates was distributed among the 25 centers of the consortium. A descriptive analysis was performed, and results were compared to existing guidelines and recommendations. RESULTS: Response rate was 96%. Standard epilepsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols are acquired at 3 Tesla by 15 centers and at 1.5 Tesla by 9 centers. Three centers perform 3T MRI only if indicated. Twenty-six different MRI sequences were reported. Six centers follow all guideline-recommended MRI sequences with the proposed slice orientation and slice thickness or voxel size. Additional sequences are used by 22 centers. MRI postprocessing methods are used in 16 centers. Interictal positron emission tomography (PET) is available in 22 centers; all using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). Seventeen centers perform PET postprocessing. Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is used by 19 centers, of which 15 perform postprocessing. Four centers perform neither PET nor SPECT in children. Seven centers apply magnetoencephalography (MEG) source localization, and nine apply electroencephalography (EEG) source localization. Fourteen combinations of inverse methods and volume conduction models are used. SIGNIFICANCE: We report a large variation in the presurgical diagnostic workup among epilepsy surgery centers across Europe. This diversity underscores the need for high-quality systematic reviews, evidence-based recommendations, and harmonization of available diagnostic presurgical methods