Hogue, Olivia

Abstract Objective This study aims to evaluate the role of scalp electroencephalography (EEG; ictal and interictal patterns) in predicting resective epilepsy surgery outcomes. We use the data to further develop a nomogram to predict seizure freedom. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the scalp EEG findings and clinical data of patients who underwent surgical resection at three epilepsy centers. Using both EEG and clinical variables categorized into 13 isolated candidate predictors and 6 interaction terms, we built a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to predict seizure freedom 2 years after surgery. Harrell's step‐down procedure was used to sequentially eliminate the least‐informative variables from the model until the change in the concordance index (c‐index) with variable removal was less than 0.01. We created a separate model using only clinical variables. Discrimination of the two models was compared to evaluate the role of scalp EEG in seizure‐freedom prediction. Results Four hundred seventy patient records were analyzed. Following internal validation, the full Clinical + EEG model achieved an optimism‐corrected c‐index of 0.65, whereas the c‐index of the model without EEG data was 0.59. The presence of focal to bilateral tonic‐clonic seizures (FBTCS), high preoperative seizure frequency, absence of hippocampal sclerosis, and presence of nonlocalizable seizures predicted worse outcome. The presence of FBTCS had the largest impact for predicting outcome. The analysis of the models’ interactions showed that in patients with unilateral interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs), temporal lobe surgery cases had a better outcome. In cases with bilateral IEDs, abnormal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) predicted worse outcomes, and in cases without IEDs, patients with extratemporal epilepsy and abnormal MRI had better outcomes. Significance This study highlights the value of scalp EEG, particularly the significance of IEDs, in predicting surgical outcome. The nomogram delivers an individualized prediction of postoperative outcome, and provides a unique assessment of the relationship between the outcome and preoperative findings.

Abstract Objective Individuals with obesity frequently contend with chronic pain, but few studies address the clinical impact of coordinated pain services on this population. The current study addresses this topic by comparing the effectiveness of a comprehensive pain rehabilitation program for patients with and without obesity. Methods A retrospective analysis of registry data was conducted. Obesity was considered as one of three weight groups, based on the following body mass index cutoffs: normal weight (18.5 to < 25 kg/m2), overweight (25 to < 30 kg/m2), and obese (> 30 kg/m2). These groups were compared on the Pain Severity Ratings (PSR) Scale, the Pain Disability Index (PDI), and the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales—Short Form (DASS-SF). Results Groups differed on baseline pain disability and depression. Patients with obesity had higher scores on both the PDI (P = .028) and the DASS-SF depression subscale (P = .006). Contrary to the hypothesis, after controlling for baseline score and sex there were no significant differences between weight groups with regards to PSR, PDI, or any DASS-SF subscale at discharge. At 1-year follow-up, individuals who were overweight and obese had significantly more anxiety compared to individuals whose weight was in the normal range. Conclusions Multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs appear to be an effective treatment intervention for patients who have concomitant chronic pain and obesity, to a degree comparable to patients who have chronic pain but do not contend with obesity. Implications for program development, clinical interventions, and future research are discussed.