Citations

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.

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.

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.

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.

The 2023 American Epilepsy Society Annual Course “It’s About Time” addressed timing in epilepsy evaluation and treatment with respect to health disparity and vulnerable populations and diagnostic, clinical, and epilepsy surgery evaluation. This comprehensive course included topics on gaps in epilepsy care and optimization of behavioral health for patients with epilepsy. The summary details current knowledge in areas of seizure forecasting and epileptogenesis. Intricacies and controversies over timing were discussed for treatment of nonconvulsive seizures and ictal-interictal patterns, acute symptomatic seizures, neuromodulation versus surgery, and epilepsy surgery in status epilepticus. Timing regarding clinical care in autoimmune-associated epilepsy, developmental and epileptic encephalopathy, and dietary therapy were examined. Additionally, salient topics on using novel biomarkers and collaboration with neuropsychological outcomes were also tackled in this all-encompassing lecture series.

With more than 6000 attendees between in-person and virtual offerings, the American Epilepsy Society Meeting 2022 in Nashville, felt as busy as in prepandemic times. An ever-growing number of physicians, scientists, and allied health professionals gathered to learn a variety of topics about epilepsy. The program was carefully tailored to meet the needs of professionals with different interests and career stages. This article summarizes the different symposia presented at the meeting. Basic science lectures addressed the primary elements of seizure generation and pathophysiology of epilepsy in different disease states. Scientists congregated to learn about anti-seizure medications, mechanisms of action, and new tools to treat epilepsy including surgery and neurostimulation. Some symposia were also dedicated to discuss epilepsy comorbidities and practical issues regarding epilepsy care. An increasing number of patient advocates discussing their stories were intertwined within scientific activities. Many smaller group sessions targeted more specific topics to encourage member participation, including Special Interest Groups, Investigator, and Skills Workshops. Special lectures included the renown Hoyer and Lombroso, an ILAE/IBE joint session, a spotlight on the impact of Dobbs v. Jackson on reproductive health in epilepsy, and a joint session with the NAEC on coding and reimbursement policies. The hot topics symposium was focused on traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic epilepsy. A balanced collaboration with the industry allowed presentations of the latest pharmaceutical and engineering advances in satellite symposia.