Interrater reliability in neurology objective structured clinical examination across specialties.

PURPOSE: To assess interrater reliability and examiners' characteristics, especially specialty, associated with scoring of neurology objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: During a neurology mock OSCE, five randomly chosen students volunteers were filmed while performing 1 of the 5 stations. Video recordings were scored by physicians from the Lyon and Clermont-Ferrand university teaching hospitals to assess students performance using both a checklist scoring and a global rating scale. Interrater reliability between examiners were assessed using intraclass coefficient correlation. Multivariable linear regression models including video recording as random effect dependent variable were performed to detect factors associated with scoring. RESULTS: Thirty examiners including 15 (50%) neurologists participated. The intraclass correlation coefficient of checklist scores and global ratings between examiners were 0.71 (CI95% [0.45-0.95]) and 0.54 (CI95% [0.28-0.91]), respectively. In multivariable analyses, no factor was associated with checklist scores, while male gender of examiner was associated with lower global rating (ß coefficient = -0.37; CI 95% [-0.62-0.11]). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated through a video-based scoring method that agreement among examiners was good using checklist scoring while moderate using global rating scale in neurology OSCE. Examiner's specialty did not affect scoring whereas gender was associated with global rating scale.

Early-Stage Contactin-Associated Protein-like 2 Limbic Encephalitis: Clues for Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous studies suggested that autoimmune limbic encephalitis with antibodies against contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CASPR2-encephalitis) is clinically heterogeneous and progresses slowly, preventing its early recognition. We aimed to describe the onset and progression of CASPR2-encephalitis and to assess long-term outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of all patients whose CSF tested positive for anti-CASPR2 antibodies in our center between 2006 and 2020. Standardized telephone interviews of all available patients and relatives were conducted, assessing long-term functional independence using the Functional Activity Questionnaire (FAQ) and quality of life using the 36-Item Short-Form Survey (SF36). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included (98% males; median age 64 years), and 35 participated in telephone interviews (73%). At onset, 81% had at least 1 neurologic symptom among the following: limbic (54%), peripheral nerve hyperexcitability (PNH; 21%), and/or cerebellar symptoms (17%). Most of the patients (75%) had initially symptoms of only one of these categories. Limbic symptoms at onset included mostly seizures (33%), while memory disturbances were less frequent (10%). PNH signs were mostly neuropathic pain (9/10 patients). Other symptoms seen at onset included asthenia (33%), mood disorders (25%), and insomnia (21%); 19% of patients did not show any limbic, peripheral, or cerebellar symptom at onset but only asthenia (15%), mood disorders (6%), weight loss (8%), dysautonomia (4%), and/or insomnia (2%). The peak of the disease was attained in median 16.7 months after onset. Over the study period (median follow-up, 58.8 months, range 10.6-189.1), 77% of patients developed ≥3 core CASPR2 symptoms and 42% fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for autoimmune limbic encephalitis, although all patients ultimately developed limbic symptoms. At the last visit, most interviewed patients (28/35 patients, 80%; median, 5 years after onset) had recovered functional independence (FAQ <9) while only the vitality subscore of the SF36 was lower than normative data (mean 49.9 vs 58.0, p = 0.0369). DISCUSSION: CASPR2-encephalitis has a progressive course and is highly heterogeneous at the early stage. In men older than 50 years, otherwise unexplained seizures, cerebellar ataxia, and/or neuropathic pain are suggestive of early-stage CASPR2-encephalitis, especially if they coincide with recent asthenia, mood disorders, or insomnia.

Long-term evolution and prognostic factors of epilepsy in limbic encephalitis with LGI1 antibodies.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the evolution of epilepsy in patients with leucine-rich glioma inactivated 1 antibody-associated (LGI1ab) limbic encephalitis, including factors associated with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with LGI1 encephalitis managed at two tertiary epilepsy centers between 2005 and 2019 and whose samples were confirmed by the French Reference Center of Paraneoplastic Neurological Syndromes. Raw clinical, biological, EEG, and MRI data were reviewed. Two endpoints were defined: (i) Epilepsy remission: patients seizure free and in whom anti-seizure medications (ASM) have been stopped for at least 1 year at the last follow-up visit (ii) DRE: patients with persistent seizures at the last follow-up despite at least two ASM used at efficacious daily dose. RESULTS: 39 patients with LGI1 encephalitis were included with a median follow-up duration of 42 months (range 13-169). All of them reported seizures at the acute phase, with faciobrachial dystonic seizures (FBDS) in 23 (59%) and other focal seizures in 38 (97%), including 4 patients (10%) with de novo status epilepticus. At the last follow-up visit, 11 patients (28%) achieved epilepsy remission. Among the 28 patients with persistent epilepsy, eight (29%) fulfilled criteria of DRE. The only factor significantly associated with epilepsy remission was the time from clinical onset of the encephalitis to initiation of the first immunomodulatory treatment, with longer delay in patients with persistent epilepsy (7.5 ± 8.9 vs 2.4 ± 1.7 months, p = 0.006). Evolution to DRE was only driven by MRI evolution. Eight of the 15 patients (53%) who developed hippocampal atrophy (p = 0.007) also suffered from drug-resistant seizures at the last follow-up. SIGNIFICANCE: In patients with LGI1 encephalitis, rapid initiation of immunomodulatory treatment favors long-term epilepsy remission. Evolution to DRE might primarily reflect the anatomical lesion of limbic structures. Determining what modalities of immune treatment may alter these outcomes requires prospective studies with long-term follow-up.

Clinical Management of Drug Resistant Epilepsy: A Review on Current Strategies.

Drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) is defined as the persistence of seizures despite at least two syndrome-adapted antiseizure drugs (ASD) used at efficacious daily dose. Despite the increasing number of available ASD, about a third of patients with epilepsy still suffer from drug resistance. Several factors are associated with the risk of evolution to DRE in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy, including epilepsy onset in the infancy, intellectual disability, symptomatic epilepsy and abnormal neurological exam. Pharmacological management often consists in ASD polytherapy. However, because quality of life is driven by several factors in patients with DRE, including the tolerability of the treatment, ASD management should try to optimize efficacy while anticipating the risks of drug-related adverse events. All patients with DRE should be evaluated at least once in a tertiary epilepsy center, especially to discuss eligibility for non-pharmacological therapies. This is of paramount importance in patients with drug resistant focal epilepsy in whom epilepsy surgery can result in long-term seizure freedom. Vagus nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulation or cortical stimulation can also improve seizure control. Lastly, considering the effect of DRE on psychologic status and social integration, comprehensive care adaptations are always needed in order to improve patients' quality of life.

Is the mechanism of action of antiseizure drugs a key element in the choice of treatment?

About 25 antiseizure drugs are available for the treatment of patients with epilepsy. The choice of the most suited drug for a specific patient is primarily based on the results of the pivotal randomized clinical trials and on the patient's characteristics and comorbidities. Whether or not the mechanism of action of the antiseizure drugs should be also taken into account to better predict the patient's response to the treatment remains a matter of debate. Despite the apparent complexity and diversity of antiseizure drug mechanisms of action, the reality unfortunately remains that they are very close, in particular with regard to their relationship with the pathophysiology of epilepsy. With the only exception of the association between lamotrigine and sodium valproate, there are no clinical data that formally support a synergistic association between certain antiseizure drugs in terms of efficacy. However, anticipating risk of adverse events by limiting as far as possible the combination of drugs, which share the same mechanisms of action, is undoubtedly an important driver of daily therapeutic decisions.