Cognitive effects of lamotrigine compared with topiramate in patients with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cognitive effects of lamotrigine vs topiramate as adjunctive therapy in adults with epilepsy. METHODS: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, prospective study was conducted in adults with partial seizures. Lamotrigine or topiramate was introduced as an adjunctive therapy to carbamazepine or phenytoin and titrated over 8 weeks to target doses. These drugs were maintained another 8 weeks (maintenance phase) without dosage changes. The primary endpoint was change from screening to the end of the maintenance phase in a combined analysis of standardized measures of cognition (Controlled Oral Word Association Task [COWA]; Stroop Color-Word Interference; Digit Cancellation; Lafayette Grooved Pegboard, dominant hand; Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, delayed recall; and Symbol-Digit Modalities test). RESULTS: For the primary endpoint, cognitive performance at the end of the maintenance phase was better with lamotrigine than with topiramate (415.3 vs 315.1; p < 0.001). On the individual cognitive tests, performance was better with lamotrigine than with topiramate in mean changes from screening on the COWA (p < 0.001), Stroop Color-Word Interference (p = 0.038), and Symbol-Digit Modalities tests (p < 0.001). The treatment effect exceeded the minimum clinically important difference for the COWA and the Symbol-Digit Modalities test. Mean changes from screening in the Performance-On-Line test simulating driving skills reflected better performance with lamotrigine than with topiramate (p = 0.021). The median percentage change from baseline in seizure frequency was lower with lamotrigine than with topiramate during the escalation phase (-80% vs -100%; p = 0.028) but not during the maintenance phase (-75% vs -100%; p = 0.062). The frequencies of cognitive adverse events and of premature withdrawals related to cognitive decline were higher with topiramate than with lamotrigine (6% vs 0%; p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Lamotrigine had significantly less impact than topiramate on measures of cognition when used as adjunctive therapy for partial seizures.

Gasoline sniffing multifocal neuropathy.

The polyneuropathy caused by chronic gasoline inhalation is reported to be a gradually progressive, symmetric, sensorimotor polyneuropathy. We report unleaded gasoline sniffing by a female 14 years of age that precipitated peripheral neuropathy. In contrast with the previously reported presentation of peripheral neuropathy in gasoline inhalation, our patient developed multiple mononeuropathies superimposed on a background of sensorimotor polyneuropathy. The patient illustrates that gasoline sniffing neuropathy may present with acute multiple mononeuropathies resembling mononeuritis multiplex, possibly related to increased peripheral nerve susceptibility to pressure in the setting of neurotoxic components of gasoline. The presence of tetraethyl lead, which is no longer present in modern gasoline mixtures, is apparently not a necessary factor in the development of gasoline sniffer's neuropathy.

Current practice in administration and clinical criteria of emergent EEG.

Policies of administration and availability of EEG offered during nonbusiness hours vary widely among EEG laboratories. The authors surveyed medical directors of accredited EEG laboratories (n = 84) to determine the ranges of availability and clinical indications for approval of continuously available emergent EEG (E-EEG). Of 46 respondents, 37 (80%) offered E-EEG. Two centers recently lost funding for E-EEG. Availability was not associated with the total number of EEGs performed annually. The mean estimated response time from request to expert interpretation was 3 +/- 4 hours (range, 1-24 hours). The five clinical indications for which most respondents approved E-EEGs were possible nonconvulsive status epilepticus (100%), treatment of status epilepticus (84%), cerebral death exam (81%), diagnosis of convulsive status epilepticus (79%), and diagnosis of coma or encephalopathy (70%). Respondents disagreed widely when asked which clinical situations merited E-EEG, with some approving all requests and others denying all except for nonconvulsive status epilepticus. The wide range of current practice suggests that research focused on outcomes of aggressive, EEG-aided patient evaluation and treatment are needed to define better the costs and benefits of a continuously available EEG service.