Neuropsychological outcome after subtemporal versus transsylvian approach for selective amygdalohippocampectomy in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: a randomised prospective clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of different surgical approaches for selective amygdalohippocampectomy in patients with pharmacoresistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy with regard to the neuropsychological outcome and to replicate an earlier study employing a matched-pair design. METHOD: 47 patients were randomised to subtemporal versus transsylvian approaches. Memory, language, attentional and executive functions were assessed before and 1 year after surgery. Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) with presurgical and postsurgical assessments as within-subject variables and approach and side of surgery as between-subject factors were calculated. Additionally, the frequencies of individual performance changes based on reliable change indices were analysed. RESULTS: Seizure freedom International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) 1a, was achieved in 62% of all patients without group difference. MANOVAs revealed no significant effects of approach on cognition. Tested separately for each parameter, verbal recognition memory declined irrespective of approach. Post hoc tests revealed that on group level, the subtemporal approach was associated with a worse outcome for verbal learning and delayed free recall as well as for semantic fluency. Accordingly, on individual level, more patients in the subtemporal group declined in verbal learning. Left side of surgery was associated with decline in naming regardless of approach. CONCLUSION: The main analysis did not confirm the effects of approach on memory outcome seen in our previous study. Post hoc testing, however, showed greater memory losses with the subtemporal approach. Previous findings were replicated for semantic fluency. The discrepant results are discussed on the background of the different study designs.

Current standards of neuropsychological assessment in epilepsy surgery centers across Europe.

We explored the current practice with respect to the neuropsychological assessment of surgical epilepsy patients in European epilepsy centers, with the aim of harmonizing and establishing common standards. Twenty-six epilepsy centers and members of "E-PILEPSY" (a European pilot network of reference centers in refractory epilepsy and epilepsy surgery), were asked to report the status of neuropsychological assessment in adults and children via two different surveys. There was a consensus among these centers regarding the role of neuropsychology in the presurgical workup. Strong agreement was found on indications (localization, epileptic dysfunctions, adverse drugs effects, and postoperative monitoring) and the domains to be evaluated (memory, attention, executive functions, language, visuospatial skills, intelligence, depression, anxiety, and quality of life). Although 186 different tests are in use throughout these European centers, a core group of tests reflecting a moderate level of agreement could be discerned. Variability exists with regard to indications, protocols, and paradigms for the assessment of hemispheric language dominance. For the tests in use, little published evidence of clinical validity in epilepsy was provided. Participants in the survey reported a need for improvement concerning the validity of the tests, tools for the assessment of everyday functioning and accelerated forgetting, national norms, and test co-normalization. Based on the present survey, we documented a consensus regarding the indications and principles of neuropsychological testing. Despite the variety of tests in use, the survey indicated that there may be a core set of tests chosen based on experience, as well as on published evidence. By combining these findings with the results of an ongoing systematic literature review, we aim for a battery that can be recommended for the use across epilepsy surgical centers in Europe.