Rossetti, Andrea O.

Understanding the evolution of clinical tools and models of care is fundamental to advancing the field of epilepsy. The 2025 American Epilepsy Society Annual Course examined the expanding spectrum of epilepsy care through the integration of multispecialty collaboration, innovative diagnostic modalities, and surgical and nonsurgical therapeutic interventions. The course underscored significant global advancements in epilepsy research and practice. This comprehensive review synthesizes key educational insights from the program, offering a critical perspective on the ongoing transformation of epilepsy care.

ImportanceUnderstanding the relationship between patients’ clinical characteristics and outcomes is fundamental to medicine. When critically ill patients die after withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST), the inability to observe the potential for recovery with continued aggressive care could bias future clinical decisions and research.ObjectiveTo quantify the frequency with which experts consider patients who died after WLST following resuscitated cardiac arrest to have had recovery potential if life-sustaining therapy had been continued.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective cohort study included comatose adult patients (aged ≥18 years) treated following resuscitation from cardiac arrest at a single academic medical center between January 1, 2010, and July 31, 2022. Patients with advanced directives limiting critical care or who experienced cardiac arrest of traumatic or neurologic etiology were excluded. An international cohort of experts in post-arrest care based on clinical experience and academic productivity was identified. Experts reviewed the cases between August 24, 2022, and February 11, 2024.ExposurePatients who died after WLST.Main Outcome and MeasuresThree or more experts independently estimated recovery potential for each patient had life-sustaining treatment been continued, using a 7-point numerical ordinal scale. In the primary analysis, which involved the patient cases with death after WLST, a 1% or greater estimated recovery potential was considered to be clinically meaningful. In secondary analyses, thresholds of 5% and 10% estimated recovery probability were explored.ResultsA total of 2391 patients (median [IQR] age, 59 [48-69] years; 1455 men [60.9%]) were included, of whom 714 (29.9%) survived to discharge. Cases of uncertain outcome (1431 patients [59.8%]) in which WLST preceded death were reviewed by 38 experts who rendered 4381 estimates of recovery potential. In 518 cases (36.2%; 95% CI, 33.7%-38.7%), all experts believed that recovery potential was less than 1% if life-sustaining therapies had been continued. In the remaining 913 cases (63.8%; 95% CI, 61.3%-66.3%), at least 1 expert believed that recovery potential was at least 1%. In 227 cases (15.9%; 95% CI, 14.0%-17.9%), all experts agreed that recovery potential was at least 1%, and in 686 cases (47.9%; 95% CI, 45.3%-50.6%), expert estimates differed at this threshold.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of comatose patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest, most who died after WLST were considered by experts to have had recovery potential. These findings suggest that novel solutions to avoiding deaths based on biased prognostication or incomplete information are needed.

SummaryWe convened an international group of experts to standardize definitions of New‐Onset Refractory Status Epilepticus (NORSE), Febrile Infection‐Related Epilepsy Syndrome (FIRES), and related conditions. This was done to enable improved communication for investigators, physicians, families, patients, and other caregivers. Consensus definitions were achieved via email messages, phone calls, an in‐person consensus conference, and collaborative manuscript preparation. Panel members were from 8 countries and included adult and pediatric experts in epilepsy, electroencephalography (EEG), and neurocritical care. The proposed consensus definitions are as follows: NORSE isa clinical presentation, not a specific diagnosis, in a patient without active epilepsy or other preexisting relevant neurological disorder, with new onset of refractory status epilepticus without a clear acute or active structural, toxic or metabolic cause. FIRES is a subcategory of NORSE, applicable for all ages, that requires a prior febrile infection starting between 2 weeks and 24 hours prior to onset of refractory status epilepticus, with or without fever at onset of status epilepticus. Proposed consensus definitions are also provided for Infantile Hemiconvulsion‐Hemiplegia and Epilepsy syndrome (IHHE) and for prolonged, refractory and super‐refractory status epilepticus. This document has been endorsed by the Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium. We hope these consensus definitions will promote improved communication, permit multicenter research, and ultimately improve understanding and treatment of these conditions.

Objective:The prognostic role of electroencephalography during and after targeted temperature management in postcardiac arrest patients, relatively to other predictors, is incompletely known. We assessed performances of electroencephalography during and after targeted temperature management toward good and poor outcomes, along with other recognized predictors.Design:Cohort study (April 2009 to March 2016).Setting:Two academic hospitals (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN).Patients:Consecutive comatose adults admitted after cardiac arrest, identified through prospective registries.Interventions:All patients were managed with targeted temperature management, receiving prespecified standardized clinical, neurophysiologic (particularly, electroencephalography during and after targeted temperature management), and biochemical evaluations.Measurements and Main Results:We assessed electroencephalography variables (reactivity, continuity, epileptiform features, and prespecified “benign” or “highly malignant” patterns based on the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society nomenclature) and other clinical, neurophysiologic (somatosensory-evoked potential), and biochemical prognosticators. Good outcome (Cerebral Performance Categories 1 and 2) and mortality predictions at 3 months were calculated. Among 357 patients, early electroencephalography reactivity and continuity and flexor or better motor reaction had greater than 70% positive predictive value for good outcome; reactivity (80.4%; 95% CI, 75.9–84.4%) and motor response (80.1%; 95% CI, 75.6–84.1%) had highest accuracy. Early benign electroencephalography heralded good outcome in 86.2% (95% CI, 79.8–91.1%). False positive rates for mortality were less than 5% for epileptiform or nonreactive early electroencephalography, nonreactive late electroencephalography, absent somatosensory-evoked potential, absent pupillary or corneal reflexes, presence of myoclonus, and neuron-specific enolase greater than 75 µg/L; accuracy was highest for early electroencephalography reactivity (86.6%; 95% CI, 82.6–90.0). Early highly malignant electroencephalography had an false positive rate of 1.5% with accuracy of 85.7% (95% CI, 81.7–89.2%).Conclusions:This study provides class III evidence that electroencephalography reactivity predicts both poor and good outcomes, and motor reaction good outcome after cardiac arrest. Electroencephalography reactivity seems to be the best discriminator between good and poor outcomes. Standardized electroencephalography interpretation seems to predict both conditions during and after targeted temperature management.