Citations

Abstract We propose an instructive figure that summarized the classification of epilepsy syndromes according to the 2022 report of the ILAE Task Force on Nosology and Definitions. Our aim is to present on the same figure different concepts such as the names of epilepsy syndromes, their extreme and classical ages of onset, their epilepsy types (generalized, focal, or generalized and focal) but also their membership in groups of epilepsy syndromes as for self‐limited or developmental and epileptic encephalopathies. With this figure, we provide an interactive tool, as supplementary data, helping to present this classification and link it to electro‐clinical mandatory, alerts, and exclusionary criteria of each syndrome, in accordance with the ILAE position papers on syndromes classification and nosology. This report may be used as an illustrative tool for teaching epilepsy syndromes and as a practical and comprehensive aid for the classification of epilepsy individuals' syndromes.

AbstractEpilepsy syndromes have been recognized for >50 years, as distinct electroclinical phenotypes with therapeutic and prognostic implications. Nonetheless, no formally accepted International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) classification of epilepsy syndromes has existed. The ILAE Task Force on Nosology and Definitions was established to reach consensus regarding which entities fulfilled criteria for an epilepsy syndrome and to provide definitions for each syndrome. We defined an epilepsy syndrome as “a characteristic cluster of clinical and electroencephalographic features, often supported by specific etiological findings (structural, genetic, metabolic, immune, and infectious).” The diagnosis of a syndrome in an individual with epilepsy frequently carries prognostic and treatment implications. Syndromes often have age‐dependent presentations and a range of specific comorbidities. This paper describes the guiding principles and process for syndrome identification in both children and adults, and the template of clinical data included for each syndrome. We divided syndromes into typical age at onset, and further characterized them based on seizure and epilepsy types and association with developmental and/or epileptic encephalopathy or progressive neurological deterioration. Definitions for each specific syndrome are contained within the corresponding position papers.

Abstract The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Task Force on Nosology and Definitions proposes a classification and definition of epilepsy syndromes in the neonate and infant with seizure onset up to 2 years of age. The incidence of epilepsy is high in this age group and epilepsy is frequently associated with significant comorbidities and mortality. The licensing of syndrome specific antiseizure medications following randomized controlled trials and the development of precision, gene‐related therapies are two of the drivers defining the electroclinical phenotypes of syndromes with onset in infancy. The principal aim of this proposal, consistent with the 2017 ILAE Classification of the Epilepsies, is to support epilepsy diagnosis and emphasize the importance of classifying epilepsy in an individual both by syndrome and etiology. For each syndrome, we report epidemiology, clinical course, seizure types, electroencephalography (EEG), neuroimaging, genetics, and differential diagnosis. Syndromes are separated into self‐limited syndromes, where there is likely to be spontaneous remission and developmental and epileptic encephalopathies , diseases where there is developmental impairment related to both the underlying etiology independent of epileptiform activity and the epileptic encephalopathy. The emerging class of etiology‐specific epilepsy syndromes, where there is a specific etiology for the epilepsy that is associated with a clearly defined, relatively uniform, and distinct clinical phenotype in most affected individuals as well as consistent EEG, neuroimaging, and/or genetic correlates, is presented. The number of etiology‐defined syndromes will continue to increase, and these newly described syndromes will in time be incorporated into this classification. The tables summarize mandatory features, cautionary alerts, and exclusionary features for the common syndromes. Guidance is given on the criteria for syndrome diagnosis in resource‐limited regions where laboratory confirmation, including EEG, MRI, and genetic testing, might not be available.

Abstract The 2017 International League Against Epilepsy classification has defined a three‐tier system with epilepsy syndrome identification at the third level. Although a syndrome cannot be determined in all children with epilepsy, identification of a specific syndrome provides guidance on management and prognosis. In this paper, we describe the childhood onset epilepsy syndromes, most of which have both mandatory seizure type(s) and interictal electroencephalographic (EEG) features. Based on the 2017 Classification of Seizures and Epilepsies, some syndrome names have been updated using terms directly describing the seizure semiology. Epilepsy syndromes beginning in childhood have been divided into three categories: (1) self‐limited focal epilepsies, comprising four syndromes: self‐limited epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes, self‐limited epilepsy with autonomic seizures, childhood occipital visual epilepsy, and photosensitive occipital lobe epilepsy; (2) generalized epilepsies, comprising three syndromes: childhood absence epilepsy, epilepsy with myoclonic absence, and epilepsy with eyelid myoclonia; and (3) developmental and/or epileptic encephalopathies, comprising five syndromes: epilepsy with myoclonic–atonic seizures, Lennox–Gastaut syndrome, developmental and/or epileptic encephalopathy with spike‐and‐wave activation in sleep, hemiconvulsion–hemiplegia–epilepsy syndrome, and febrile infection‐related epilepsy syndrome. We define each, highlighting the mandatory seizure(s), EEG features, phenotypic variations, and findings from key investigations.

AbstractObjectiveTo estimate time to onset of cannabidiol (CBD) treatment effect (seizure reduction and adverse events [AEs]), we conducted post hoc analyses of data from two randomized, placebo‐controlled, Phase 3 trials, GWPCARE3 (NCT02224560) and GWPCARE4 (NCT02224690), of patients with Lennox–Gastaut syndrome.MethodsPatients received plant‐derived pharmaceutical formulation of highly purified CBD (Epidiolex, 100 mg/ml oral solution) at 10 mg/kg/day (CBD10; GWPCARE3) or 20 mg/kg/day (CBD20; both trials) or placebo for 14 weeks. Treatment started at 2.5 mg/kg/day for all groups and reached 10 mg/kg/day on Day 7 and 20 mg/kg/day (CBD20 and matching placebo only) on Day 11. Percentage change from baseline in drop seizure frequency was calculated by cumulative day (i.e., including all previous days). Time to onset and resolution of AEs were evaluated.ResultsOverall, 235 patients received CBD (CBD10 [GWPCARE3 only],n = 67; CBD20 [pooled GWPCARE3&4],n = 168) and 161 received placebo. Mean (range) age was 15.3 years (2.6–48.0). Patients had previously discontinued a median (range) of six (0–28) antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and were currently taking a median of three (0–5) AEDs. Differences in drop seizure reduction between placebo and CBD emerged during the titration period and became nominally significant by Day 6 (p = .008) for pooled CBD treatment groups. Separation between placebo and CBD in ≥50% responder rate emerged by Day 6. Onset of the first reported AE occurred during the titration period in 45% of patients (CBD10, 46%; CBD20, 52%; placebo, 38%). In patients with AEs, resolution occurred within 4 weeks of onset in 53% of placebo and 39% of CBD patients and by end of study in 63% of placebo and 61% of CBD patients.SignificanceTreatment effect (efficacy and AEs) of CBD may occur within 1 week of starting treatment. Although AEs lasted longer for CBD than placebo, most resolved within the 14‐week period.

Objective: To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on global access to care and practice patterns for children with epilepsy. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey of pediatric neurologists across the world affiliated with the International Child Neurology Association, the Chinese Child Neurology Society, the Child Neurology Society, and the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium. Results were analyzed in relation to regional burden of COVID-19 disease. Results: From April 10 to 24, 2020, a sample of 212 respondents from 49 countries indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed many aspects of pediatric epilepsy care, with 91.5% reporting changes to outpatient care, 90.6% with reduced access to electroencephalography (EEG), 37.4% with altered management of infantile spasms, 92.3% with restrictions in ketogenic diet initiation, 93.4% with closed or severely limited epilepsy monitoring units, and 91.3% with canceled or limited epilepsy surgery. Telehealth use had increased, with 24.7% seeing patients exclusively via telehealth. Changes in practice were related both to COVID-19 burden and location. Conclusions: In response to COVID-19, pediatric epilepsy programs have implemented crisis standards of care that include increased telemedicine, decreased EEG use, changes in treatments of infantile spasms, and cessation of epilepsy surgery. The long-term impact of these abrupt changes merit careful study.

SummaryAttention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common and challenging comorbidity affecting many children with epilepsy. A working group under the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Pediatric Commission identified key questions on the identification and management of ADHD in children with epilepsy. Systematic reviews of the evidence to support approaches to these questions were collated and graded using criteria from the American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) requirements were followed, with PROSPERO registration (CRD42018094617). No increased risk of ADHD in boys with epilepsy compared to girls with epilepsy was found (Level A). Valproate use in pregnancy is associated with inattentiveness and hyperactivity in offspring (1 class I study), and children with intellectual and developmental disabilities are at increased risk of ADHD (Level A). Impact of early seizure onset on development of ADHD was unclear (Level U), but more evident with poor seizure control (Level B). ADHD screening should be performed from 6 years of age, or at diagnosis, and repeated annually (Level U) and reevaluated after change of antiepileptic drug (AED) (Level U). Diagnosis should involve health practitioners with expert training in ADHD (Level U). Use of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire screening tool is supported (Level B). Formal cognitive testing is strongly recommended in children with epilepsy who are struggling at school (Level U). Behavioral problems are more likely with polytherapy than monotherapy (Level C). Valproate can exacerbate attentional issues in children with childhood absence epilepsy (Level A). Methylphenidate is tolerated and effective in children with epilepsy (Level B). Limited evidence supports that atomoxetine is tolerated (Level C). Multidisciplinary involvement in transition and adult ADHD clinics is essential (Level U). In conclusion, although recommendations could be proposed for some of the study questions, this systematic review highlighted the need for more comprehensive and targeted large‐population prospective studies.

Summary Ketogenic dietary therapies ( KDTs ) are established, effective nonpharmacologic treatments for intractable childhood epilepsy. For many years KDTs were implemented differently throughout the world due to lack of consistent protocols. In 2009, an expert consensus guideline for the management of children on KDT was published, focusing on topics of patient selection, pre‐ KDT counseling and evaluation, diet choice and attributes, implementation, supplementation, follow‐up, side events, and KDT discontinuation. It has been helpful in outlining a state‐of‐the‐art protocol, standardizing KDT for multicenter clinical trials, and identifying areas of controversy and uncertainty for future research. Now one decade later, the organizers and authors of this guideline present a revised version with additional authors, in order to include recent research, especially regarding other dietary treatments, clarifying indications for use, side effects during initiation and ongoing use, value of supplements, and methods of KDT discontinuation. In addition, authors completed a survey of their institution's practices, which was compared to responses from the original consensus survey, to show trends in management over the last 10 years.