Perspectives on the current developments with neuromodulation for the treatment of epilepsy.

Introduction: As deep brain stimulation revolutionized the treatment of movement disorders in the late 80s, neuromodulation in the treatment of epilepsy will undoubtedly undergo transformative changes in the years to come with the exponential growth of technological development moving into mainstream practice; the appearance of companies such as Facebook, Google, Neuralink within the realm of brain-computer interfaces points to this trend.Areas covered: This perspective piece will talk about the history of brain stimulation in epilepsy, current-approved treatments, technical developments and the future of neurostimulation.Expert opinion: Further understanding of the brain alongside machine learning and innovative technology will be the future of neuromodulation for the treatment of epilepsy. All of these innovations and advances should pave the way toward overcoming the vexing underutilization of surgery in the therapeutic armamentarium against medically refractory seizures, given the implicit advantage of a neuromodulatory rather than neurodestructive approach.

Position Statement on the Use of Medical Cannabis for the Treatment of Epilepsy in Canada.

In Canada, recreational use of cannabis was legalized in October 2018. This policy change along with recent publications evaluating the efficacy of cannabis for the medical treatment of epilepsy and media awareness about its use have increased the public interest about this agent. The Canadian League Against Epilepsy Medical Therapeutics Committee, along with a multidisciplinary group of experts and Canadian Epilepsy Alliance representatives, has developed a position statement about the use of medical cannabis for epilepsy. This article addresses the current Canadian legal framework, recent publications about its efficacy and safety profile, and our understanding of the clinical issues that should be considered when contemplating cannabis use for medical purposes.

Énoncé de position quant à l'utilisation du cannabis médical dans le traitement de l'épilepsie. L'utilisation du cannabis à des fins récréatives a été légalisée au Canada en octobre 2018. Parallèlement à ce changement de politique, de récentes publication visant à évaluer l'efficacité du cannabis dans le traitement de l'épilepsie, de même qu'une sensibilisation médiatique accrue en ce qui concerne son utilisation, ont eu pour effet d'augmenter l'intérêt du grand public à son égard. Le Comité médical thérapeutique de la Ligue canadienne contre l'épilepsie (LCCE), de concert avec un groupe multidisciplinaire d'experts et des représentants de l'Alliance canadienne de l'épilepsie, a ainsi élaboré un énoncé de position en ce qui regarde l'utilisation du cannabis médical dans le traitement de l'épilepsie. Cet article entend donc aborder le cadre légal qui prévaut actuellement au Canada et examiner de récentes publications s'étant penchées sur le profil sécuritaire et sur l'efficacité du cannabis. De plus, nous voulons apporter un éclairage au sujet des aspects cliniques dont il faudrait tenir compte au moment d'envisager l'utilisation du cannabis à des fins médicales.

Global Birth Prevalence of Spina Bifida by Folic Acid Fortification Status: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Birth defects remain a significant source of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Strong scientific evidence shows that folic acid fortification of a region's food supply leads to a decrease in spina bifida (a birth defect of the spine). Still, many countries around the world have yet to approve mandatory fortification through government legislation. OBJECTIVES: We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of period prevalence of spina bifida by folic acid fortification status, geographic region, and study population. SEARCH METHODS: An expert research librarian used terms related to neural tube defects and epidemiology from primary research from 1985 to 2010 to search in EMBASE and MEDLINE. We searched the reference lists of included articles and key review articles identified by experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria included studies in English or French reporting on prevalence published between January 1985 and December 2010 that (1) were primary research, (2) were population-based, and (3) reported a point or period prevalence estimate of spina bifida (i.e., prevalence estimate with confidence intervals or case numerator and population denominator). Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts for eligible articles, then 2 authors screened full texts in duplicate for final inclusion. Disagreements were resolved through consensus or a third party. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, or PRISMA, abstracting data related to case ascertainment, study population, folic acid fortification status, geographic region, and prevalence estimate independently and in duplicate. We extracted overall data and any subgroups reported by age, gender, time period, or type of spina bifida. We classified each period prevalence estimate as "mandatory" or "voluntary" folic acid fortification according to each country's folic acid fortification status at the time data were collected (as determined by a well-recognized fortification monitoring body, Food Fortification Initiative). We determined study quality on the basis of sample representativeness, standardization of data collection and birth defect assessment, and statistical analyses. We analyzed study-level period prevalence estimates by using a random effects model (α level of < 0.05) for all meta-analyses. We stratified pooled period prevalence estimates by birth population, fortification status, and continent. RESULTS: Of 4078 studies identified, we included 179 studies in the systematic review and 123 in a meta-analysis. In studies of live births (LBs) alone, period prevalences of spina bifida were (1) lower in geographical regions with mandatory (33.86 per 100,000 LBs) versus voluntary (48.35 per 100,000 LBs) folic acid fortification, and (2) lower in studies of LBs, stillbirths, and terminations of pregnancy in regions with mandatory (35.22 per 100,000 LBs) versus voluntary (52.29 per 100,000 LBs) fortification. In LBs, stillbirths, and terminations of pregnancy studies, the lowest pooled prevalence estimate was in North America (38.70 per 100,000). Case ascertainment, surveillance methods, and reporting varied across these population-based studies. CONCLUSIONS: Mandatory legislation enforcing folic acid fortification of the food supply lags behind the evidence, particularly in Asian and European countries. This extensive literature review shows that spina bifida is significantly more common in world regions without government legislation regulating full-coverage folic acid fortification of the food supply (i.e., Asia, Europe) and that mandatory folic acid fortification resulted in a lower prevalence of spina bifida regardless of the type of birth cohort. African data were scarce, but needed, as many African nations are beginning to adopt folic acid legislation.

Use of complementary and alternative medicine by those with a chronic disease and the general population--results of a national population based survey.

BACKGROUND: The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is becoming more common, but population-based descriptions of its patterns of use are lacking. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of CAM use in the general population and for those with asthma, diabetes, epilepsy and migraine. METHODS: Data from cycles 1.1, 2.1 and 3.1 of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) were used for the study. The CCHS is a national cross-sectional survey administered to 400,055 Canadians aged ≥12 between 2001-2005. Self-reported information about professionally diagnosed health conditions was elicited. CCHS surveys use a multistage stratified cluster design to randomly select a representative sample of Canadian household residents. Descriptive data on the utilization of CAM services was calculated and logistic regression was used to determine what sociodemographic factors predict CAM use. RESULTS: Weighted estimates show that 12.4% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 12.2-12.5) of Canadians visited a CAM practitioner in the year they were surveyed; this rate was significantly higher for those with asthma 15.1% (95% CI: 14.5-15.7) and migraine 19.0% (95% CI: 18.4-19.6), and significantly lower for those with diabetes 8.0% (95% CI: 7.4-8.6) while the rate in those with epilepsy (10.3%, 95% CI: 8.4-12.2) was not significantly different from the general population. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of Canadians use CAM services. Physicians should be aware that their patients may be accessing other services and should be prepared to ask and answer questions about the risks and benefits of CAM services in conjunction with standard medical care.

Randomized trials and collaborative research in epilepsy surgery: future directions.

BACKGROUND: Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating therapeutic interventions, surgical RCTs are particularly challenging and few have been done in the field of epilepsy surgery. We assess the level of RCT activity in epilepsy surgery and propose feasible alternatives to develop sustainable research initiatives in this area. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of the world literature to assess the level of RCT activity in epilepsy surgery. Previous personal experience with RCTs in epilepsy surgery and examples of successful Canadian multicentre research networks were reviewed to propose initiatives for sustainable, valid research in epilepsy surgery. RESULTS: We identified 12 RCTs in epilepsy surgery, including 692 patients, of whom 416 were involved in vagus nerve stimulation, 16 in various brain electrostimulation procedures, 180 in comparisons of different surgical techniques, and 80 in a comparison of medical versus surgical therapy. Most studies were of short duration (median=3 months, range 3-12 months). In the area of resective surgery, only temporal lobe epilepsy has been subjected to any type of RCT comparison. All RCTs have been done within the last 13 years. There were no multicentre Canadian surgical studies. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of RCTs in epilepsy surgery has been slow and difficult worldwide. Because of its universal health care system and its well established epilepsy surgery centres, Canada is in a strong position to create a national epilepsy surgery research initiative capable of undertaking high quality, sustainable research in epilepsy surgery.