Citations

Abstract Objective Invasive presurgical evaluation plays a key role in pediatric epilepsy surgery, particularly in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)‐negative cases, by guiding resective, disconnective, or ablative procedures. This International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery Taskforce study provides an updated global overview of current invasive evaluation practices. Methods Group‐level data were collected from 61 epilepsy surgery programs (49 pediatric‐only) in 29 countries across six continents. Included were children and adolescents who underwent presurgical evaluation and epilepsy surgery in 2023. The study was designed to enable comparison with the similar ILAE survey conducted in 2004. Results A total of 2427 patients were included. Invasive evaluations were performed in 21.1% of cases, most frequently in North America (33.7%, higher than Europe: 18.0%, p = .003). Among invasive cases, 32.3% had no detectable MRI abnormalities. The main indication for invasive evaluation was seizure onset localization (88.1%), followed by motor or sensory mapping (17.2%) and language mapping (14.2%). Stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) was the predominant technique (19.8% overall, 93.6% of invasive cases), more common in North America (30.0%, p = .021) and less common in South America (7.4%, p < .001). Subdural electrodes were used in only 3.2% of invasive cases, and combined depth and subdural approaches in 3.2%. SEEG‐guided radiofrequency thermocoagulation (RF‐TC) was performed in 40.9% of SEEG cases, most commonly in Asia (63.8%). In 16.2% of invasive evaluations, patients did not proceed to resection, disconnection, or ablation, with the highest rate in Europe (28.5%). Significance This global survey provides the first broad overview of invasive evaluation practices in pediatric epilepsy surgery across participating centers worldwide. It highlights the widespread adoption of SEEG, declining use of subdural electrodes, and increasing application of SEEG‐guided RF‐TC. The high proportion of MRI‐negative cases and the considerable proportion of patients not proceeding to resection, disconnection, or ablation underscore the complexity of contemporary surgical candidates and the need for further refinement of selection strategies.

Abstract Objective Pediatric epilepsy surgery is well established, but contemporary global data on referral and presurgical evaluation practices are lacking. This International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery Task Force study provides an updated overview of current trends and regional differences. Methods Group‐level data were collected from 61 epilepsy surgery programs (49 pediatric‐only) across 29 countries and six continents, identified through ILAE networks, and included all children and adolescents treated in 2023 who underwent presurgical evaluation/epilepsy surgery. Results Group‐level data were available for 2427 patients. Mean age at surgery was 9.1 ± 4.9 years; mean epilepsy duration was 5.3. At surgery, 3.2% were <1 year old (highest in Oceania: 5.1%), and 6.1% were nonpharmacoresistant (highest in Europe: 15.0%). Prior neurosurgery was reported in 14.2% (highest in North America: 28.8%), including 8.0% resections (6.1% for epilepsy, 1.5% for tumors; highest in Oceania: 16.5%), 2.3% disconnections (1.3% corpus callosotomy; highest in South America: 4.7%), and 4.2% neuromodulation (3.7% vagal nerve stimulation, .2% responsive neurostimulation, one deep brain stimulation; highest in North America: 12.2%). Developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) at surgery included Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (7.4%), infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (5.1%), and DEE with spike–wave activation in sleep (1.5%). Presurgical investigations included fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (52.6%; highest in Oceania: 79.7%), genetic testing (46.8%; highest in Asia: 54.3%), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) postprocessing (32.4%; highest in South America: 53.0%), functional MRI (fMRI; 15.2%; highest in North America: 40.3%), magnetoencephalography (11.9%; highest in North America: 39.3%), single photon emission computed tomography (9.6%; highest in North America: 22.2%), high‐density electroencephalography (EEG; 1.9%; highest in Europe: 4.7%), source localization (1.6%; highest in Oceania: 7.6%), Wada test (1.2%; highest in North America: 3.5%), and EEG‐fMRI (.5%; highest in Europe: 1.1%). Significance Despite some early surgeries, including in infancy and before pharmacoresistance, mean epilepsy duration before surgery remains >5 years. Reoperations are common, with resection more frequent than neuromodulation. Genetic testing in nearly half of patients reflects its growing relevance, and the high rate of DEEs underscores the complexity of surgical candidates.

Abstract This paper provides a practical guide to applying the updated seizure classification in clinical settings. The updated classification, published by the International League Against Epilepsy in 2025, builds on the operational classification introduced in 2017. It aims to enhance clarity, clinical relevance, and consistency in seizure terminology across various healthcare settings. The classification system distinguishes between four main seizure classes: focal, generalized, unknown whether focal or generalized, and unclassified. The basic version allows for application even in resource‐limited or primary care environments, while the expanded version offers detailed semiological descriptors and supports advanced diagnostic and surgical decision‐making. Consciousness, defined through awareness (recall) and responsiveness, is now considered a classifier. The paper also highlights the importance of distinguishing observable from non‐observable features and integrates semiology into the expanded classification with attention to temporal sequence and somatotopic detail. Generalized seizures are categorized into seizure types having a direct impact on syndrome diagnosis and treatment decisions. Epileptic spasms are given special attention because of their unique presentation and the urgency of early intervention, particularly in infants. To support clinical implementation, this paper includes a comprehensive table of semiological descriptors, definitions of generalized seizure types, and a series of real‐world case vignettes illustrating the application of the updated seizure classification. Supplementary figures and videos further support the educational aims of the paper. This practical guide is intended for healthcare professionals managing patients with epilepsy, providing a clear, structured approach to seizure classification that is adaptable to varying levels of clinical expertise and diagnostic resources.

Abstract The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) has updated the operational classification of epileptic seizures, building upon the framework established in 2017. This revision, informed by the implementation experience, involved a working group appointed by the ILAE Executive Committee. Comprising 37 members from all ILAE regions, the group utilized a modified Delphi process, requiring a consensus threshold of more than two thirds for any proposal. Following public comments, the Executive Committee appointed seven additional experts to the revision task force to address and incorporate the issues raised, as appropriate. The updated classification maintains four main seizure classes: Focal, Generalized, Unknown (whether focal or generalized), and Unclassified. Taxonomic rules distinguish classifiers, which are considered to reflect biological classes and directly impact clinical management, from descriptors, which indicate other important seizure characteristics. Focal seizures and those of unknown origin are further classified by the patient's state of consciousness (impaired or preserved) during the seizure, defined operationally through clinical assessment of awareness and responsiveness. If the state of consciousness is undetermined, the seizure is classified under the parent term, that is, the main seizure class (focal seizure or seizure of unknown origin). Generalized seizures are grouped into absence seizures, generalized tonic–clonic seizures, and other generalized seizures, now including recognition of negative myoclonus as a seizure type. Seizures are described in the basic version as with or without observable manifestations, whereas an expanded version utilizes the chronological sequence of seizure semiology. This updated classification comprises four main classes and 21 seizure types. Special emphasis was placed on ensuring translatability into languages beyond English. Its aim is to establish a common language for all health care professionals involved in epilepsy care, from resource‐limited areas to highly specialized centers, and to provide accessible terms for patients and caregivers.

AbstractThe Psychiatric Pediatric Issues Task Force of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) aimed to develop recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of anxiety and depression in children and adolescents with epilepsy. The Task Force conducted a systematic review and identified two studies that assessed the accuracy of four screening measures for depression and anxiety symptoms compared with a psychiatric interview. Nine studies met the eligibility criteria for treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders or symptoms. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed. The evidence generated by this review followed by consensus where evidence was missing generated 47 recommendations. Those with a high level of agreement (≥80%) are summarized. Diagnosis: (1) Universal screening for anxiety and depression is recommended. Closer surveillance is recommended for children after 12 years, at higher risk (e.g., suicide‐related behavior), with subthreshold symptoms, and experiencing seizure worsening or therapeutic modifications. (2) Multiple sources of ascertainment and a formal screening are recommended. Clinical interviews are recommended whenever possible. The healthcare provider must always explain that symptom recognition is essential to optimize treatment outcomes and reduce morbidity. (3) Questioning about the relationship between symptoms of anxiety or depression with seizure worsening/control and behavioral adverse effects of antiseizure medications is recommended. Treatment: (1) An individualized treatment plan is recommended. (2) For mild depression, active monitoring must be considered. (3) Referral to a mental health care provider must be considered for moderate to severe depression and anxiety. (4) Clinical care pathways must be developed. (5) Psychosocial interventions must be tailored and age‐appropriate. (6) Healthcare providers must monitor children with epilepsy who are prescribed antidepressants, considering symptoms and functioning that may not improve simultaneously. (7) Caregiver education is essential to ensure treatment adherence. (8) A shared‐care model involving all healthcare providers is recommended for children and adolescents with epilepsy and mental health disorders. We identified clinical decisions in the management of depression and anxiety that lack solid evidence and provide consensus‐based guidance to address the care of children and adolescents with epilepsy.

Abstract A variety of terms, such as “antiepileptic,” “anticonvulsant,” and “antiseizure” have been historically applied to medications for the treatment of seizure disorders. Terminology is important because using terms that do not accurately reflect the action of specific treatments may result in a misunderstanding of their effects and inappropriate use. The present International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) position paper used a Delphi approach to develop recommendations on English‐language terminology applicable to pharmacological agents currently approved for treating seizure disorders. There was consensus that these medications should be collectively named “antiseizure medications”. This term accurately reflects their primarily symptomatic effect against seizures and reduces the possibility of health care practitioners, patients, or caregivers having undue expectations or an incorrect understanding of the real action of these medications. The term “antiseizure” to describe these agents does not exclude the possibility of beneficial effects on the course of the disease and comorbidities that result from the downstream effects of seizures, whenever these beneficial effects can be explained solely by the suppression of seizure activity. It is acknowledged that other treatments, mostly under development, can exert direct favorable actions on the underlying disease or its progression, by having “antiepileptogenic” or “disease‐modifying” effects. A more‐refined terminology to describe precisely these actions needs to be developed.

AbstractLimited guidance exists regarding the assessment and management of psychogenic non‐epileptic seizures (PNES) in children. Our aim was to develop consensus‐based recommendations to fill this gap. The members of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Task Force on Pediatric Psychiatric Issues conducted a scoping review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐SR) standards. This was supplemented with a Delphi process sent to pediatric PNES experts. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement. The systematic search identified 77 studies, the majority (55%) of which were retrospective (only one randomized clinical trial). The primary means of PNES identification was video electroencephalography (vEEG) in 84% of studies. Better outcome was associated with access to counseling/psychological intervention. Children with PNES have more frequent psychiatric disorders than controls. The Delphi resulted in 22 recommendations: Assessment—There was consensus on the importance of (1) taking a comprehensive developmental history; (2) obtaining a description of the events; (3) asking about potential stressors; (4) the need to use vEEG if available parent, self, and school reports and video recordings can contribute to a “probable” diagnosis; and (5) that invasive provocation techniques or deceit should not be employed. Management—There was consensus about the (1) need for a professional with expertise in epilepsy to remain involved for a period after PNES diagnosis; (2) provision of appropriate educational materials to the child and caregivers; and (3) that the decision on treatment modality for PNES in children should consider the child's age, cognitive ability, and family factors. Comorbidities—There was consensus that all children with PNES should be screened for mental health and neurodevelopmental difficulties. Recommendations to facilitate the assessment and management of PNES in children were developed. Future directions to fill knowledge gaps were proposed.