Fountain, Nathan B.

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.

AbstractObjectiveFocused ultrasound ablation (FUSA) is an emerging treatment for neurological and psychiatric diseases. We describe the initial experience from a pilot, open‐label, single‐center clinical trial of unilateral anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) FUSA in patients with treatment‐refractory epilepsy.MethodsTwo adult subjects with treatment‐refractory, focal onset epilepsy were recruited. The subjects received ANT FUSA using the Exablate Neuro (Insightec) system. We determined the safety and feasibility (primary outcomes), and changes in seizure frequency (secondary outcome) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Safety was assessed by the absence of side effects, that is, new onset neurological deficits or performance deterioration on neuropsychological testing. Feasibility was defined as the ability to create a lesion within the anterior nucleus. The monthly seizure frequency was compared between baseline and postthalamotomy.ResultsThe patients tolerated the procedure well, without neurological deficits or serious adverse events. One patient experienced a decline in verbal fluency, attention/working memory, and immediate verbal memory. Seizure frequency reduced significantly in both patients; one patient was seizure‐free at 12 months, and in the second patient, the frequency reduced from 90–100 seizures per month to 3–6 seizures per month.SignificanceThis is the first known clinical trial to assess the safety, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of ANT FUSA in adult patients with treatment‐refractory focal onset epilepsy.

Abstract Objective The evaluation to determine candidacy and treatment for epilepsy surgery in persons with drug‐resistant epilepsy (DRE) is not uniform. Many non‐invasive and invasive tests are available to ascertain an appropriate treatment strategy. This study examines expert response to clinical vignettes of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–positive lesional focal cortical dysplasia in both temporal and extratemporal epilepsy to identify associations in evaluations and treatment choice. Methods We analyzed annual report data and a supplemental epilepsy practice survey reported in 2020 from 206 adult and 136 pediatric epilepsy center directors in the United States. Non‐invasive and invasive testing and surgical treatment strategies were compiled for the two scenarios. We used chi‐square tests to compare testing utilization between the two scenarios. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was performed to assess associations between variables. Results The supplemental survey response rate was 100% with 342 responses included in the analyses. Differing testing and treatment approaches were noted between the temporal and extratemporal scenarios such as chronic invasive monitoring selected in 60% of the temporal scenario versus 93% of the extratemporal scenario. Open resection was the most common treatment choice; however, overall treatment choices varied significantly ( p < .001). Associations between non‐invasive testing, invasive testing, and treatment choices were present in both scenarios. For example, in the temporal scenario stereo‐electroencephalography (SEEG) was more commonly associated with fluorodeoxyglucose–positron emission tomography (FDG‐PET) (odds ratio [OR] 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–3.29; p = .033), magnetoencephalography (MEG) (OR 2.90; 95% CI 1.60–5.28; p = <.001), high density (HD) EEG (OR 2.80; 95% CI 1.27–6.24; p = .011), functional MRI (fMRI) (OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.19–4.10; p = .014), and Wada (OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.28–3.66; p = .004). In the extratemporal scenario, choosing SEEG was associated with increased odds of neuromodulation over open resection (OR 3.13; 95% CI 1.24–7.89; p = .016). Significance In clinical vignettes of temporal and extratemporal lesional DRE, epilepsy center directors displayed varying patterns of non‐invasive testing, invasive testing, and treatment choices. Differences in practice underscore the need for comparative trials for the surgical management of DRE.

Abstract Objective Persons with drug‐resistant epilepsy may benefit from epilepsy surgery and should undergo presurgical testing to determine potential candidacy and appropriate intervention. Institutional expertise can influence use and availability of evaluations and epilepsy surgery candidacy. This census survey study aims to examine the influence of geographic region and other center characteristics on presurgical testing for medically intractable epilepsy. Methods We analyzed annual report and supplemental survey data reported in 2020 from 206 adult epilepsy center directors and 136 pediatric epilepsy center directors in the United States. Test utilization data were compiled with annual center volumes, available resources, and US Census regional data. We used Wilcoxon rank‐sum, Kruskal–Wallis, and chi‐squared tests for univariate analysis of procedure utilization. Multivariable modeling was also performed to assign odds ratios (ORs) of significant variables. Results The response rate was 100% with individual element missingness < 11% across 342 observations undergoing univariate analysis. A total of 278 complete observations were included in the multivariable models, and significant regional differences were present. For instance, compared to centers in the South, those in the Midwest used neuropsychological testing (OR = 2.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2–6.86; p = .018) and fluorodeoxyglucose–positron emission tomography (OR = 2.74, 95% CI = = 1.14–6.61; p = .025) more commonly. For centers in the Northeast (OR = .46, 95% CI = .23–.93; p = .031) and West (OR = .41, 95% CI = .19–.87; p = .022), odds of performing single‐photon emission computerized tomography were lower by nearly 50% compared to those in the South. Center accreditation level, demographics, volume, and resources were also associated with varying individual testing rates. Significance Presurgical testing for drug‐resistant epilepsy is influenced by US geographic region and other center characteristics. These findings have potential implications for comparing outcomes between US epilepsy centers and may inject disparities in access to surgical treatment.

AbstractObjectivesDrug treatment for children with epilepsy should, ideally, be governed by evidence from adequate and well‐controlled clinical studies. However, these studies are difficult to conduct, and so direct evidence supporting the informed use of specific drugs is often lacking. The Research Roundtable for Epilepsy (RRE) met in 2020 to align on an approach to therapy development for focal seizures in children age 1 month <2 years of age.MethodsThe RRE reviewed the regulatory landscape, epidemiology, seizure semiology, antiseizure medicine pharmacology, and safety issues applicable to this population.ResultsAfter reviewing evidence, the conclusion was that pediatric efficacy trials would be impracticable to conduct but a waiver of the regulatory requirement to conduct any study would lead to an absence of information to guide dosing in a critical population. Review of available data and discussion of RRE attendees led to the conclusion that the requirements for extrapolation of efficacy from older children down to infants from age 1 month to <2 years old appeared to be met. After the RRE, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brivaracetam for use in children with focal epilepsy above the age of 1 month in August 2021 and lacosamide in October 2021, both based on the principle of extrapolation from data in older children.SignificanceThese recommendations should result in more rapid accessibility of antiseizure medications for infants.

SummaryObjectiveEvaluate the seizure‐reduction response and safety of mesial temporal lobe (MTL) brain‐responsive stimulation in adults with medically intractable partial‐onset seizures of mesial temporal lobe origin.MethodsSubjects with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) were identified from prospective clinical trials of a brain‐responsive neurostimulator (RNS System, NeuroPace). The seizure reduction over years 2–6 postimplantation was calculated by assessing the seizure frequency compared to a preimplantation baseline. Safety was assessed based on reported adverse events.ResultsThere were 111 subjects with MTLE; 72% of subjects had bilateral MTL onsets and 28% had unilateral onsets. Subjects had one to four leads placed; only two leads could be connected to the device. Seventy‐six subjects had depth leads only, 29 had both depth and strip leads, and 6 had only strip leads. The mean follow‐up was 6.1 ± (standard deviation) 2.2 years. The median percent seizure reduction was 70% (last observation carried forward). Twenty‐nine percent of subjects experienced at least one seizure‐free period of 6 months or longer, and 15% experienced at least one seizure‐free period of 1 year or longer. There was no difference in seizure reduction in subjects with and without mesial temporal sclerosis (MTS), bilateral MTL onsets, prior resection, prior intracranial monitoring, and prior vagus nerve stimulation. In addition, seizure reduction was not dependent on the location of depth leads relative to the hippocampus. The most frequent serious device‐related adverse event was soft tissue implant‐site infection (overall rate, including events categorized as device‐related, uncertain, or not device‐related: 0.03 per implant year, which is not greater than with other neurostimulation devices).SignificanceBrain‐responsive stimulation represents a safe and effective treatment option for patients with medically intractable epilepsy, including patients with unilateral or bilateral MTLE who are not candidates for temporal lobectomy or who have failed a prior MTL resection.

SummaryObjectiveEvaluate the seizure‐reduction response and safety of brain‐responsive stimulation in adults with medically intractable partial‐onset seizures of neocortical origin.MethodsPatients with partial seizures of neocortical origin were identified from prospective clinical trials of a brain‐responsive neurostimulator (RNS System, NeuroPace). The seizure reduction over years 2–6 postimplantation was calculated by assessing the seizure frequency compared to a preimplantation baseline. Safety was assessed based on reported adverse events. Additional analyses considered safety and seizure reduction according to lobe and functional area (e.g., eloquent cortex) of seizure onset.ResultsThere were 126 patients with seizures of neocortical onset. The average follow‐up was 6.1 implant years. The median percent seizure reduction was 70% in patients with frontal and parietal seizure onsets, 58% in those with temporal neocortical onsets, and 51% in those with multilobar onsets (last observation carried forward [LOCF] analysis). Twenty‐six percent of patients experienced at least one seizure‐free period of 6 months or longer and 14% experienced at least one seizure‐free period of 1 year or longer. Patients with lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; 77% reduction, LOCF) and those with normal MRI findings (45% reduction, LOCF) benefitted, although the treatment response was more robust in patients with an MRI lesion (p = 0.02, generalized estimating equation [GEE]). There were no differences in the seizure reduction in patients with and without prior epilepsy surgery or vagus nerve stimulation. Stimulation parameters used for treatment did not cause acute or chronic neurologic deficits, even in eloquent cortical areas. The rates of infection (0.017 per patient implant year) and perioperative hemorrhage (0.8%) were not greater than with other neurostimulation devices.SignificanceBrain‐responsive stimulation represents a safe and effective treatment option for patients with medically intractable epilepsy, including adults with seizures of neocortical onset, and those with onsets from eloquent cortex.

Summary Objective Patients with suspected mesial temporal lobe ( MTL ) epilepsy typically undergo inpatient video–electroencephalography ( EEG ) monitoring with scalp and/or intracranial electrodes for 1 to 2 weeks to localize and lateralize the seizure focus or foci. Chronic ambulatory electrocorticography ( EC oG) in patients with MTL epilepsy may provide additional information about seizure lateralization. This analysis describes data obtained from chronic ambulatory EC oG in patients with suspected bilateral MTL epilepsy in order to assess the time required to determine the seizure lateralization and whether this information could influence treatment decisions. Methods Ambulatory EC oG was reviewed in patients with suspected bilateral MTL epilepsy who were among a larger cohort with intractable epilepsy participating in a randomized controlled trial of responsive neurostimulation. Subjects were implanted with bilateral MTL leads and a cranially implanted neurostimulator programmed to detect abnormal interictal and ictal EC oG activity. EC oG data stored by the neurostimulator were reviewed to determine the lateralization of electrographic seizures and the interval of time until independent bilateral MTL electrographic seizures were recorded. Results Eighty‐two subjects were implanted with bilateral MTL leads and followed for 4.7 years on average (median 4.9 years). Independent bilateral MTL electrographic seizures were recorded in 84%. The average time to record bilateral electrographic seizures in the ambulatory setting was 41.6 days (median 13 days, range 0–376 days). Sixteen percent had only unilateral electrographic seizures after an average of 4.6 years of recording. Significance About one third of the subjects implanted with bilateral MTL electrodes required >1 month of chronic ambulatory EC oG before the first contralateral MTL electrographic seizure was recorded. Some patients with suspected bilateral MTL seizures had only unilateral electrographic seizures. Chronic ambulatory EC oG in patients with suspected bilateral MTL seizures provides data in a naturalistic setting, may complement data from inpatient video‐ EEG monitoring, and can contribute to treatment decisions.