Abstract Objective Surgery is an effective, yet underutilized treatment for children with drug‐resistant epilepsy. Although predictors of surgical outcomes are well described, the decision to recommend surgery varies by institution. We aim to evaluate the rates of not recommending surgery, identify associated patient characteristics, and quantify variability across centers. Methods We queried the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium Surgery database, a prospective multicenter cohort of children (0–18 years) undergoing initial evaluation for epilepsy surgery. Patients with documented surgical decisions were included. Demographic, clinical, and presurgical evaluation variables were compared by surgical recommendation status. Logistic regression identified factors associated with not recommending surgery. Mixed‐effects models quantified between‐center variability. Results Among 2480 patients across 29 centers, 532 (21%) were not recommended epilepsy surgery (median center rate 17%, interquartile range [IQR] 10%–28%). After accounting for patient characteristics associated with surgical candidacy, substantial variation in decision‐making remained across centers, with a median twofold difference in the odds of not recommending surgery between otherwise similar patients evaluated at different institutions (Median Odds Ratio = 2.25; Intraclass Correlation Coefficient = .18). The clinical characteristics most strongly associated with not recommending surgery included monthly or less frequent seizures (odds ratio [OR] 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.75–2.69), non‐structural etiology (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.56–2.61), and taking ≤2 anti‐seizure medications (ASMs) (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.34–2.08, all p 's < .01). These characteristics showed minimal clustering across centers (ICCs < .05). Significance One in five children evaluated for epilepsy surgery are not recommended to pursue surgical treatment. Although clinical factors influence decision‐making, they do not explain the substantial variation in recommendations across pediatric epilepsy centers. Similar children evaluated at different institutions had significant differences in the odds of not being recommended surgery, suggesting that institutional decision‐making contributes importantly to surgical candidacy.
Effect of time to palliative epilepsy surgery on outcomes
Abstract Objective Epilepsy duration is a modifiable risk factor in the outcome of definitive epilepsy surgery; however, an analogous effect in palliative procedures has not been shown. We reviewed the Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery Database data for an association between epilepsy duration and seizure reduction in palliative procedures. Methods Patients enrolled between January 2018 and April 2025 who underwent their first epilepsy surgery with palliative intent with 6 months of follow‐up were included. Procedures included neuromodulation, corpus callosotomy, hemispherotomy, lesionectomy, and lobectomy where surgical intent was not seizure freedom. Outcomes of seizure freedom, 90% seizure reduction, and 50% seizure reduction were considered at 6–12 months and >12 months from surgery. Duration from epilepsy onset to surgery was compared for patients above and below each outcome threshold at each time point. Logistic regression analysis for the association between epilepsy duration and seizure reduction adjusted for potential confounders including procedure type, etiology, and other clinical factors. Logistic regression analysis was performed on the overall cohort and subgroups of patients with each procedure. Results A total of 588 patients were included. Initial univariate analysis suggested that epilepsy duration at time of surgery was significantly associated with seizure freedom and 90% seizure reduction at both 6–12 months and >12 months. After adjusting for confounders, only seizure freedom at >12 months was significantly associated with duration of epilepsy. When individual procedures were considered, only lobectomy was sensitive to duration of epilepsy in multivariate analysis, with significant impacts on >50% and >90% seizure reduction at >12 months. Lesional epilepsy predicted seizure freedom at >12 months. Neuromodulation and corpus callosotomy were less likely to achieve seizure reduction than other procedures. Significance We did not find an association between early epilepsy surgery and seizure reduction. This reflects the heterogeneity of our population, including different types of surgical procedures and lesional and nonlesional epilepsies.
Delayed Surgical Evaluation After Drug-Resistant Epilepsy Diagnosis Worsens Outcomes in Children
Abstract Objective Despite being safe and effective, surgery for pediatric epilepsy is underutilized. Social determinants of health (SDoH) are important to consider when examining this treatment gap. This study examined the potential systemic inequities at three different stages in the journey toward epilepsy surgery across the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium (PERC). Methods Any youth in the PERC prospective surgery database (≤18 years) was eligible and included if sociodemographic factors were also available. We examined if there were differences in disparity factors in: (1) referral to Phase I evaluation, (2) offering of surgery, and (3) completion of surgery. Results Of 1309 patients, the majority were male (53%, p = .04), White (82.2%, p < .001), not Hispanic or Latino (84.3%, p < .001), and privately insured (56.3%, p < .001). Of the youth who were offered surgical treatment ( n = 1103, 84.3%), there were no significant differences in race/ethnicity or sex. Those with a structural lesion were more likely to be offered surgery, and historically marginalized youth were more likely to have a lesion. Of patients who completed surgery ( n = 927, 84.0%), White patients were 1.88 times (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14–3.04) more likely than Black patients to complete surgery ( p = .01). Significance Youth who began surgery evaluation are not representative of the demographics of those with epilepsy in the United States, with greater representation of White, non‐Hispanic male individuals. In addition, youth who began surgery evaluation disproportionally have private insurance. At the next stage of offering surgery, there were no differences based on SDoH. However, there is evidence that underrepresented youth that were magnetic resonance negative were less likely to be referred for surgical workup and that Black youth were less likely to undergo surgery. Therefore, efforts to provide equitable opportunity for all youth with refractory epilepsy should be concentrated at the referral for surgery evaluation point of care; however, additional efforts are also needed at later stages.
Stiripentol use in Dravet syndrome patients in the
USA
: Results of a real‐world study
Abstract Objective Dravet syndrome (DS) is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy with a high seizure burden and mortality risk. Stiripentol, one of the first DS‐specific therapies, received FDA approval in 2018 but its real‐world use and impact post‐approval in the USA remain insufficiently characterized. The STIRUS study aimed to assess treatment patterns, clinical efficacy, and quality of life outcomes associated with stiripentol in a contemporary US cohort. Methods STIRUS was a retrospective, multicenter chart review of 98 DS patients who initiated stiripentol after FDA approval and were treated for at least 3 months. Data were collected from 10 USA epilepsy centers on seizure types and frequency, status epilepticus (SE), rescue medication use, emergency room visits, and quality of life, at baseline and during the first and final 3 months on stiripentol. Changes over time were assessed using generalized estimating equation models. Results Initiation of stiripentol was associated with a significant reduction in bilateral convulsive seizure frequency (OR = 2.16, p < 0.006) and a nearly 50% decrease in SE episodes (OR = 2.9, p < 0.003). Importantly, there was a marked decline in rescue medication use and seizure‐related hospital visits: the proportion of patients requiring no rescue medications increased from 23% to over 53%, and those needing frequent emergency interventions dropped from 39% at baseline to 14% during the final 3 months. Quality of life improved in more than half of patients and caregivers. Significance The STIRUS study supports the real‐world efficacy of stiripentol in reducing seizure burden and healthcare utilization in DS. Despite its demonstrated benefits and approval for use in infants, stiripentol remains underutilized and often introduced late in the treatment course. Early and broader adoption may help improve clinical outcomes and quality of life in this vulnerable population. Plain Language Summary The STIRUS study found that stiripentol, an anti‐seizure medication specifically approved for Dravet Syndrome, helped reduce seizures and hospital visits for children living with this severe form of epilepsy. Patients had fewer convulsive seizures, needed fewer rescue medicines, and reported better quality of life. Despite these benefits, stiripentol is still not widely used and often started too late in treatment, suggesting earlier use could further improve outcomes.
Natural History of Children and Adolescents With Dravet Syndrome
ABSTRACT Rationale Longer duration of epilepsy before surgery is a predictor of poor outcome. While referral delays of surgical candidates are well documented, factors causing delay during the presurgical evaluation remain unclear and may vary depending on institutional characteristics. By benchmarking the duration of presurgical evaluation across multiple centers and identifying patient and evaluation characteristics contributing to duration, we can ascertain best practices and address modifiable contributors to reduce delays. Methods We queried the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium Surgery Database, a prospective, observational multicenter study enrolling children 0–18 years at 27 US pediatric epilepsy centers, for all patients undergoing initial presurgical evaluation for drug‐resistant epilepsy (DRE). We included patients with completed evaluations and data on duration from initiation of presurgical evaluation to final surgical decision. We compared patient characteristics and evaluation components between those with long duration evaluations (> 75% quartile) and those with short evaluations (< 25% quartile). Akaike information criteria selection identified variables associated with longer duration. From these, we developed a logistic prediction model for evaluation duration, using a random 80/20 training/testing split of the entire cohort. The model was tested among institutions with ≥ 10 patients in the cohort to assess its accuracy in predicting long durations. Linear models for each site assessed each variable's impact on duration. Variables with < 10% of the patient population at each site were excluded. Beta values were compared to identify intra‐ and inter‐institution variability and to delineate institutions with the shortest added duration for each variable. Results Of 2318 patients undergoing surgical evaluation, 1655 (71%) from 23 sites had complete data. Median evaluation duration was 8 weeks (interquartile range 3–22); 453 (27%) were short‐duration evaluations and 414 (25%) were long‐duration evaluations. Multiple patient and evaluation characteristics were associated with duration (Table 1). Table 6 provides the average duration each variable contributes to evaluation by site, highlighting the shortest durations compared with other groups. Conclusions Duration of presurgical evaluation for DRE can be accurately modeled using multiple patient characteristics and testing strategies commonly employed in epilepsy surgery evaluations. This predictive model can not only estimate evaluation duration but also identify opportunities to improve systemic efficiency. Institution‐level modeling identifies specific program strengths, providing an opportunity to learn from successful processes. Subsequent research will focus on institutional process mapping to better understand systemic practices that lead to improved efficiencies, then sharing these processes across the consortium to shorten evaluation durations.
Associations Between Testing and Treatment Pathways in a Case of Pediatric Nonlesional Epilepsy: A Census Survey of NAEC Center Directors
Objective Epilepsy surgery is vital in managing of children with drug-resistant epilepsy. Noninvasive and invasive testing modalities allow for evaluation and treatment of children with drug-resistant epilepsy. Evidence-based algorithms for this process do not exist. This study examines expert response to a vignette of pediatric nonlesional epilepsy to assess associations in evaluation and treatment choices. Methods We analyzed annual report data and an epilepsy practice survey reported in 2020 from 135 pediatric epilepsy center directors in the United States. Characteristics of centers along with noninvasive and invasive testing and surgical treatment strategies were collected. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was performed. Results The response rate was 100% with 135 responses included in the analyses. Most used noninvasive testing modalities included Neuropsychology evaluation (90%), interictal brain fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (85%), and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (72%) with nearly half obtaining genetic testing. Choosing functional MRI was associated with stereo electroencephalography (EEG) ( P = .025) and selecting Wada with subdural grid/strips ( P = .038). Directors from pediatric-only centers were more likely to choose stereo EEG as opposed to combined centers ( P = .042). Laser interstitial thermal therapy was almost 7 times as likely to be chosen as a treatment modality compared with open resection in dedicated pediatric centers (OR 6.96, P = .002). Significance In a vignette of nonlesional childhood drug-resistant epilepsy, epilepsy center directors’ patterns of noninvasive testing, invasive testing, and treatment were examined. Management choices were associated with pediatric versus combined pediatric/adult center characteristics. Expert opinions demonstrated equipoise in evaluation and management of children with drug-resistant epilepsy and the need for evidence-based management strategies.