Cascino, Gregory D.

Summary Objective Epilepsy surgery is the most effective treatment for select patients with drug‐resistant epilepsy. In this article, we aim to provide an accurate understanding of the current epidemiologic characteristics of this intervention, as this knowledge is critical for guiding educational, academic, and resource priorities. Methods We profile the practice of epilepsy surgery between 1991 and 2011 in nine major epilepsy surgery centers in the United States, Germany, and Australia. Clinical, imaging, surgical, and histopathologic data were derived from the surgical databases at various centers. Results Although five of the centers performed their highest number of surgeries for mesial temporal sclerosis ( MTS ) in 1991, and three had their highest number of MTS surgeries in 2001, only one center achieved its peak number of MTS surgeries in 2011. The most productive year for MTS surgeries varied then by center; overall, the nine centers surveyed performed 48% (95% confidence interval [CI] −27.3% to −67.4%) fewer such surgeries in 2011 compared to either 1991 or 2001, whichever was higher. There was a parallel increase in the performance of surgery for nonlesional epilepsy. Further analysis of 5/9 centers showed a yearly increase of 0.6 ± 0.07% in the performance of invasive electroencephalography ( EEG ) without subsequent resections. Overall, although MTS was the main surgical substrate in 1991 and 2001 (proportion of total surgeries in study centers ranging from 33.3% to 70.2%); it occupied only 33.6% of all resections in 2011 in the context of an overall stable total surgical volume. Significance These findings highlight the major aspects of the evolution of epilepsy surgery across the past two decades in a sample of well‐established epilepsy surgery centers, and the critical current challenges of this treatment option in addressing complex epilepsy cases requiring detailed evaluations. Possible causes and implications of these findings are discussed.

SummaryObjectiveTo determine the outcome of implanting fewer electrodes over the hemisphere with less supporting presurgical localizing data.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed our epilepsy surgery database at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2011, to identify patients who had an asymmetric number of electrode contacts implanted in each hemisphere for seizure localization. We scored each presurgical noninvasive data point (0, 0.5, or 1) to predict the likelihood of identifying seizure onset in the hemisphere with fewer intracranial electrode contacts (HFEC). An aggregate score was obtained for each patient.ResultsThirteen (37%) of 35 patients had HFEC‐onset seizures on intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG). The following factors predicted HFEC‐onset seizures: (1) temporal lobe epilepsy (p = 0.02); (2) interictal scalp electroencephalographic discharges at the HFEC (p = 0.04); and (3) both interictal and ictal scalp EEG discharges at the HFEC (p = 0.01). The median (range) aggregate score was 2 (1–3) for patients with HFEC‐onset seizures recorded on iEEG and 1 (0–3) for patients without HFEC‐onset seizures (p = 0.001). Using this scoring model, the odds ratio of identifying HFEC‐onset seizures on iEEG was 6.4 for each one‐point increment in the aggregate score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 0.84, suggesting excellent ability of the aggregate score to discriminate between patients with and without HFEC‐onset seizures on iEEG.SignificanceImplanting electrodes on the basis of limited supporting presurgical data may be useful in selected patients, especially those with temporal lobe epilepsy, interictal scalp discharges involving the HFEC, or both interictal and ictal scalp discharges involving the HFEC. In addition, our proposed scoring system may be helpful in selecting patients with complicated epilepsy for implantation of an asymmetric number of intracranial electrodes in the hemispheres.