Teratogenesis, Perinatal, and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes After In Utero Exposure to Antiseizure Medication: Practice Guideline From the AAN, AES, and SMFM.

This practice guideline provides updated evidence-based conclusions and recommendations regarding the effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) and folic acid supplementation on the prevalence of major congenital malformations (MCMs), adverse perinatal outcomes, and neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born to people with epilepsy of childbearing potential (PWECP). A multidisciplinary panel conducted a systematic review and developed practice recommendations following the process outlined in the 2017 edition of the American Academy of Neurology Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual. The systematic review includes studies through August 2022. Recommendations are supported by structured rationales that integrate evidence from the systematic review, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences from evidence. The following are some of the major recommendations. When treating PWECP, clinicians should recommend ASMs and doses that optimize both seizure control and fetal outcomes should pregnancy occur, at the earliest possible opportunity preconceptionally. Clinicians must minimize the occurrence of convulsive seizures in PWECP during pregnancy to minimize potential risks to the birth parent and to the fetus. Once a PWECP is already pregnant, clinicians should exercise caution in attempting to remove or replace an ASM that is effective in controlling generalized tonic-clonic or focal-to-bilateral tonic-clonic seizures. Clinicians must consider using lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or oxcarbazepine in PWECP when appropriate based on the patient's epilepsy syndrome, likelihood of achieving seizure control, and comorbidities, to minimize the risk of MCMs. Clinicians must avoid the use of valproic acid in PWECP to minimize the risk of MCMs or neural tube defects (NTDs), if clinically feasible. Clinicians should avoid the use of valproic acid or topiramate in PWECP to minimize the risk of offspring being born small for gestational age, if clinically feasible. To reduce the risk of poor neurodevelopmental outcomes, including autism spectrum disorder and lower IQ, in children born to PWECP, clinicians must avoid the use of valproic acid in PWECP, if clinically feasible. Clinicians should prescribe at least 0.4 mg of folic acid supplementation daily preconceptionally and during pregnancy to any PWECP treated with an ASM to decrease the risk of NTDs and possibly improve neurodevelopmental outcomes in the offspring.

How do network meta-analyses address intransitivity when assessing certainty of evidence: a systematic survey.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how systematic reviews with network meta-analyses (NMAs) that used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) NMA approach addressed intransitivity when assessing certainty of evidence. DESIGN: Systematic survey. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from September 2014 to October 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials with aggregate data NMAs that used the GRADE NMA approach for assessing certainty of evidence. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We documented how reviewers described methods for addressing intransitivity when assessing certainty of evidence, how often they rated down for intransitivity and their explanations for rating down. RESULTS: Of the 268 eligible systematic reviews, 44.8% (120/268) mentioned intransitivity when describing methods for assessing the certainty of evidence. Of these, 28.3% (34/120) considered effect modifiers and from this subset, 67.6% (23/34) specified the effect modifiers; however, no systematic review noted how they chose the effect modifiers. 15.0% (18/120) mentioned looking for differences between the direct comparisons that inform the indirect estimate. No review specified a threshold for difference in effect modifiers between the direct comparisons that would lead to rating down for intransitivity. Reviewers noted rating down indirect evidence for intransitivity in 33.1% of systematic reviews, and noted intransitivity for network estimates in 23.0% of reviews. Authors provided an explanation for rating down for intransitivity in 59.6% (31/52) of the cases in which they rated down. Of the 31 in which they provided an explanation, 74.2% (23/31) noted they detected differences in effect modifiers and 67.7% (21/31) specified in what effect modifiers they detected differences. CONCLUSIONS: A third of systematic reviews with NMAs using the GRADE approach rated down for intransitivity. Limitations in reporting of methods to address intransitivity proved considerable. Whether the problem is that reviewers neglected to address rating down for transitivity at all, or whether they did consider but not report, is not clear. At minimum systematic reviews with NMAs need to improve their reporting practices regarding intransitivity; it may well be that they need to improve their practice in transitivity assessment. How to best address intransitivity may remain unclear for many reviewers thus additional GRADE guidance providing practical instructions for addressing intransitivity may be desirable.

Minimum Technical Requirements for Performing Ambulatory EEG.

SUMMARY: Ambulatory EEG (AEEG) devices offer portable, multichannel, digital EEG recording with or without video in the patient's natural environment. The technology applied for AEEG recording is like the technology for routine EEG and inpatient long-term video-EEG monitoring but designed to be compact and wearable. Computer-based AEEG technology is well-suited to digital recording, signal processing, and visual display. However, acquiring interpretable EEG outside of the hospital setting presents its own technical challenges. Published guidelines have established technical standards for performing routine EEG and inpatient video-EEG monitoring, but technical standards for AEEG are lacking. Therefore, this guideline provides minimal technical standards for the performance of AEEG which are essential to ensure the quality of studies for clinical and research practice. We expect these minimum standards to evolve over time with improved performance and advances in the technology.

Minimum standards for inpatient long-term video-EEG monitoring: A clinical practice guideline of the international league against epilepsy and international federation of clinical neurophysiology.

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide recommendations on the indications and minimum standards for inpatient long-term video-electroencephalographic monitoring (LTVEM). The Working Group of the International League Against Epilepsy and the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology develop guidelines aligned with the Epilepsy Guidelines Task Force. We reviewed published evidence using The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We found limited high-level evidence aimed at specific aspects of diagnosis for LTVEM performed to evaluate patients with seizures and nonepileptic events (see Table S1). For classification of evidence, we used the Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual of the American Academy of Neurology. We formulated recommendations for the indications, technical requirements, and essential practice elements of LTVEM to derive minimum standards used in the evaluation of patients with suspected epilepsy using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Further research is needed to obtain evidence about long-term outcome effects of LTVEM and establish its clinical utility.

Genetic testing for the epilepsies: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous genetic testing options for individuals with epilepsy have emerged over the past decade without clear guidelines regarding optimal testing strategies. We performed a systematic evidence review (SER) and conducted meta-analyses of the diagnostic yield of genetic tests commonly utilized for patients with epilepsy. We also assessed nonyield outcomes (NYOs) such as changes in treatment and/or management, prognostic information, recurrence risk determination, and genetic counseling. METHODS: We performed an SER, in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central through December of 2020. We included studies that utilized genome sequencing (GS), exome sequencing (ES), multigene panel (MGP), and/or genome-wide comparative genomic hybridization/chromosomal microarray (CGH/CMA) in cohorts (n ≥ 10) ascertained for epilepsy. Quality assessment was undertaken using ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions). We estimated diagnostic yields and 95% confidence intervals with random effects meta-analyses and narratively synthesized NYOs. RESULTS: From 5985 nonduplicated articles published through 2020, 154 met inclusion criteria and were included in meta-analyses of diagnostic yield; 43 of those were included in the NYO synthesis. The overall diagnostic yield across all test modalities was 17%, with the highest yield for GS (48%), followed by ES (24%), MGP (19%), and CGH/CMA (9%). The only phenotypic factors that were significantly associated with increased yield were (1) the presence of developmental and epileptic encephalopathy and/or (2) the presence of neurodevelopmental comorbidities. Studies reporting NYOs addressed clinical and personal utility of testing. SIGNIFICANCE: This comprehensive SER, focused specifically on the literature regarding patients with epilepsy, provides a comparative assessment of the yield of clinically available tests, which will help shape clinician decision-making and policy regarding insurance coverage for genetic testing. We highlight the need for prospective assessment of the clinical and personal utility of genetic testing for patients with epilepsy and for standardization in reporting patient characteristics.

Minimum standards for inpatient long-term video-electroencephalographic monitoring: A clinical practice guideline of the International League Against Epilepsy and International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology.

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide recommendations on the indications and minimum standards for inpatient long-term video-electroencephalographic monitoring (LTVEM). The Working Group of the International League Against Epilepsy and the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology develop guidelines aligned with the Epilepsy Guidelines Task Force. We reviewed published evidence using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) statement. We found limited high-level evidence aimed at specific aspects of diagnosis for LTVEM performed to evaluate patients with seizures and nonepileptic events. For classification of evidence, we used the Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual of the American Academy of Neurology. We formulated recommendations for the indications, technical requirements, and essential practice elements of LTVEM to derive minimum standards used in the evaluation of patients with suspected epilepsy using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Further research is needed to obtain evidence about long-term outcome effects of LTVEM and to establish its clinical utility.

Antiseizure Medication Withdrawal in Seizure-Free Patients: Practice Advisory Update Summary: Report of the AAN Guideline Subcommittee.

OBJECTIVE: To update a 1996 American Academy of Neurology practice parameter. METHODS: The authors systematically reviewed literature published from January 1991 to March 2020. RESULTS: The long-term (24-60 months) risk of seizure recurrence is possibly higher among adults who have been seizure-free for 2 years and taper antiseizure medications (ASMs) vs those who do not taper ASMs (15% vs 7% per the 1 Class I article addressing this issue). In pediatric patients, there is probably no significant difference in seizure recurrence between those who begin tapering ASMs after 2 years vs 4 years of seizure freedom, and there is insufficient evidence of significant difference in risk of seizure recurrence between those who taper ASMs after 18 months of seizure freedom and those tapering after 24 months. There is insufficient evidence that the rate of seizure recurrence with ASM withdrawal following epilepsy surgery after 1 year of seizure freedom vs after 4 years is not significantly different than maintaining patients on ASMs. An epileptiform EEG in pediatric patients increases the risk of seizure recurrence. ASM withdrawal possibly does not increase the risk of status epilepticus in adults. In seizure-free adults, ASM weaning possibly does not change quality of life. Withdrawal of ASMs at 25% every 10 days to 2 weeks is probably not significantly different from withdrawal at 25% every 2 months in children who are seizure-free in more than 4 years of follow-up. RECOMMENDATIONS: Fourteen recommendations were developed.

Practice Guideline: Use of Quantitative EEG for the Diagnosis of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Report of the Guideline Committee of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society.

SUMMARY: Despite many decades of research, controversy regarding the utility of quantitative EEG (qEEG) for the accurate diagnosis of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) remains. This guideline is meant to assist clinicians by providing an expert review of the clinical usefulness of qEEG techniques for the diagnosis of mTBI. This guideline addresses the following primary aim: For patients with or without posttraumatic symptoms (abnormal cognition or behavior), does qEEG either at the time of injury or remote from the injury, as compared with current clinical diagnostic criteria, accurately identify those patients with mTBI (i.e., concussion)? Secondary aims included differentiating between mTBI and other diagnoses, detecting mTBI in the presence of central nervous system medications, and pertinence of statistical methods for measurements of qEEG components. It was found that for patients with or without symptoms of abnormal cognition or behavior, current evidence does not support the clinical use of qEEG either at the time of the injury or remote from the injury to diagnose mTBI (level U). In addition, the evidence does not support the use of qEEG to differentiate mTBI from other diagnoses or detect mTBI in the presence of central nervous system medications, and suitable statistical methods do not exist when using qEEG to identify patients with mTBI. Based upon the current literature review, qEEG remains an investigational tool for mTBI diagnosis (class III evidence).

Treatment of Refractory Convulsive Status Epilepticus: A Comprehensive Review by the American Epilepsy Society Treatments Committee.

PURPOSE: Established tonic-clonic status epilepticus (SE) does not stop in one-third of patients when treated with an intravenous (IV) benzodiazepine bolus followed by a loading dose of a second antiseizure medication (ASM). These patients have refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and a high risk of morbidity and death. For patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus (CRSE), we sought to determine the strength of evidence for 8 parenteral ASMs used as third-line treatment in stopping clinical CRSE. METHODS: A structured literature search (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was performed to identify original studies on the treatment of CRSE in children and adults using IV brivaracetam, ketamine, lacosamide, levetiracetam (LEV), midazolam (MDZ), pentobarbital (PTB; and thiopental), propofol (PRO), and valproic acid (VPA). Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), magnesium sulfate, and pyridoxine were added to determine the effectiveness in treating hard-to-control seizures in special circumstances. Studies were evaluated by predefined criteria and were classified by strength of evidence in stopping clinical CRSE (either as the last ASM added or compared to another ASM) according to the 2017 American Academy of Neurology process. RESULTS: No studies exist on the use of ACTH, corticosteroids, or IVIg for the treatment of CRSE. Small series and case reports exist on the use of these agents in the treatment of RSE of suspected immune etiology, severe epileptic encephalopathies, and rare epilepsy syndromes. For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists on the effectiveness of brivaracetam (level U; 4 class IV studies). For children and adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists on the effectiveness of ketamine (level U; 25 class IV studies). For children and adults with CRSE, it is possible that lacosamide is effective at stopping RSE (level C; 2 class III, 14 class IV studies). For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists that LEV and VPA are equally effective (level U, 1 class III study). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support the effectiveness of LEV (level U; 2 class IV studies). Magnesium sulfate may be effective in the treatment of eclampsia, but there are only case reports of its use for CRSE. For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support either that MDZ and diazepam infusions are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study) or that MDZ infusion and PTB are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support either that MDZ infusion and PRO are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study) or that low-dose and high-dose MDZ infusions are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For children and adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that MDZ is effective as the last drug added (level U; 29 class IV studies). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PTB and PRO are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For adults and children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PTB is effective as the last ASM added (level U; 42 class IV studies). For CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PRO is effective as the last ASM used (level U; 26 class IV studies). No pediatric-only studies exist on the use of PRO for CRSE, and many guidelines do not recommend its use in children aged <16 years. Pyridoxine-dependent and pyridoxine-responsive epilepsies should be considered in children presenting between birth and age 3 years with refractory seizures and no imaging lesion or other acquired cause of seizures. For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists that VPA and diazepam infusion are equally effective (level U, 1 class III study). No class I to III studies have been reported in adults treated with VPA for CRSE. In comparison, for children and adults with established convulsive SE (ie, not RSE), after an initial benzodiazepine, it is likely that loading doses of LEV 60 mg/kg, VPA 40 mg/kg, and fosphenytoin 20 mg PE/kg are equally effective at stopping SE (level B, 1 class I study). CONCLUSIONS: Mostly insufficient evidence exists on the efficacy of stopping clinical CRSE using brivaracetam, lacosamide, LEV, valproate, ketamine, MDZ, PTB, and PRO either as the last ASM or compared to others of these drugs. Adrenocorticotropic hormone, IVIg, corticosteroids, magnesium sulfate, and pyridoxine have been used in special situations but have not been studied for CRSE. For the treatment of established convulsive SE (ie, not RSE), LEV, VPA, and fosphenytoin are likely equally effective, but whether this is also true for CRSE is unknown. Triple-masked, randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the effectiveness of parenteral anesthetizing and nonanesthetizing ASMs in the treatment of CRSE.

Practice guideline: Treatment for insomnia and disrupted sleep behavior in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

OBJECTIVE: To review pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies for treating sleep disturbances in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and to develop recommendations for addressing sleep disturbance in this population. METHODS: The guideline panel followed the American Academy of Neurology 2011 guideline development process, as amended. The systematic review included studies through December 2017. Recommendations were based on evidence, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS LEVEL B: For children and adolescents with ASD and sleep disturbance, clinicians should assess for medications and coexisting conditions that could contribute to the sleep disturbance and should address identified issues. Clinicians should counsel parents regarding strategies for improved sleep habits with behavioral strategies as a first-line treatment approach for sleep disturbance either alone or in combination with pharmacologic or nutraceutical approaches. Clinicians should offer melatonin if behavioral strategies have not been helpful and contributing coexisting conditions and use of concomitant medications have been addressed, starting with a low dose. Clinicians should recommend using pharmaceutical-grade melatonin if available. Clinicians should counsel children, adolescents, and parents regarding potential adverse effects of melatonin use and the lack of long-term safety data. Clinicians should counsel that there is currently no evidence to support the routine use of weighted blankets or specialized mattress technology for improving disrupted sleep. If asked about weighted blankets, clinicians should counsel that the trial reported no serious adverse events with blanket use and that blankets could be a reasonable nonpharmacologic approach for some individuals.

Practice guideline update summary: Pharmacologic treatment for pediatric migraine prevention: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for migraine prevention using pharmacologic treatment with or without cognitive behavioral therapy in the pediatric population. METHODS: The authors systematically reviewed literature from January 2003 to August 2017 and developed practice recommendations using the American Academy of Neurology 2011 process, as amended. RESULTS: Fifteen class I-III studies on migraine prevention in children in adolescents met inclusion criteria. There is insufficient evidence to determine if children and adolescents receiving divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine and flunarizine are more or less likely than those receiving placebo to have a reduction in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving propranolol are possibly more likely than those receiving placebo to have an at least 50% reduction in headache frequency. Children and adolescents receiving topiramate and cinnarizine are probably more likely than those receiving placebo to have a decrease in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving amitriptyline plus cognitive behavioral therapy are more likely than those receiving amitriptyline plus headache education to have a reduction in headache frequency. Recommendations The majority of randomized controlled trials studying the efficacy of preventive medications for pediatric migraine fail to demonstrate superiority to placebo. Recommendations for the prevention of migraine in children include counseling on lifestyle and behavioral factors that influence headache frequency, and assessment and management of comorbid disorders associated with headache persistence. Clinicians should engage in shared decision making with patients and caregivers regarding the use of preventive treatments for migraine, including discussion of the limitations in the evidence to support pharmacologic treatments.

Practice guideline update summary: Acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for the acute symptomatic treatment of children and adolescents with migraine. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature and rated risk of bias of included studies according to the American Academy of Neurology classification of evidence criteria. A multidisciplinary panel developed practice recommendations, integrating findings from the systematic review and following an Institute of Medicine-compliant process to ensure transparency and patient engagement. Recommendations were supported by structured rationales, integrating evidence from the systematic review, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences from evidence. RESULTS: There is evidence to support the efficacy of the use of ibuprofen, acetaminophen (in children and adolescents), and triptans (mainly in adolescents) for the relief of migraine pain, although confidence in the evidence varies between agents. There is high confidence that adolescents receiving oral sumatriptan/naproxen and zolmitriptan nasal spray are more likely to be headache free at 2 hours than those receiving placebo. No acute treatments were effective for migraine-related nausea or vomiting; some triptans were effective for migraine-related phonophobia and photophobia. RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations for the treatment of acute migraine in children and adolescents focus on the importance of early treatment, choosing the route of administration best suited to the characteristics of the individual migraine attack, and providing counselling on lifestyle factors that can exacerbate migraine, including trigger avoidance and medication overuse.

Practice guideline update summary: Vaccine-preventable infections and immunization in multiple sclerosis: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

OBJECTIVE: To update the 2002 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline regarding immunization and multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: The panel performed a systematic review and classified articles using the AAN system. Recommendations were based on evidence, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences according to the AAN 2011 process manual, as amended. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS LEVEL B EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED: Clinicians should discuss the evidence regarding immunizations in MS with their patients and explore patients' opinions, preferences, and questions. Clinicians should recommend that patients with MS follow all local vaccine standards, unless there are specific contraindications and weigh local vaccine-preventable disease risks when counseling patients. Clinicians should recommend that patients with MS receive the influenza vaccination annually. Clinicians should counsel patients with MS about infection risks associated with specific immunosuppressive/immunomodulating (ISIM) medications and treatment-specific vaccination guidance according to prescribing information (PI) and vaccinate patients with MS as needed at least 4-6 weeks before initiating patients' ISIM therapy. Clinicians must screen for infections according to PI before initiating ISIM medications (Level A) and should treat patients testing positive for latent infections. In high-risk populations, clinicians must screen for latent infections before starting ISIM therapy even when not specifically mentioned in PI (Level A) and should consult specialists regarding treating patients who screen positive for latent infection. Clinicians should recommend against using live-attenuated vaccines in people with MS receiving ISIM therapies. Clinicians should delay vaccinating people with MS who are experiencing a relapse.

Practice guideline update summary: Pharmacologic treatment for pediatric migraine prevention: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for migraine prevention using pharmacologic treatment with or without cognitive behavioral therapy in the pediatric population. METHODS: The authors systematically reviewed literature from January 2003 to August 2017 and developed practice recommendations using the American Academy of Neurology 2011 process, as amended. RESULTS: Fifteen Class I-III studies on migraine prevention in children and adolescents met inclusion criteria. There is insufficient evidence to determine if children and adolescents receiving divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine, or flunarizine are more or less likely than those receiving placebo to have a reduction in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving propranolol are possibly more likely than those receiving placebo to have an at least 50% reduction in headache frequency. Children and adolescents receiving topiramate and cinnarizine are probably more likely than those receiving placebo to have a decrease in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving amitriptyline plus cognitive behavioral therapy are more likely than those receiving amitriptyline plus headache education to have a reduction in headache frequency. RECOMMENDATIONS: The majority of randomized controlled trials studying the efficacy of preventive medications for pediatric migraine fail to demonstrate superiority to placebo. Recommendations for the prevention of migraine in children include counseling on lifestyle and behavioral factors that influence headache frequency and assessment and management of comorbid disorders associated with headache persistence. Clinicians should engage in shared decision-making with patients and caregivers regarding the use of preventive treatments for migraine, including discussion of the limitations in the evidence to support pharmacologic treatments.

Practice guideline update summary: Acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for the acute symptomatic treatment of children and adolescents with migraine. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature and rated risk of bias of included studies according to the American Academy of Neurology classification of evidence criteria. A multidisciplinary panel developed practice recommendations, integrating findings from the systematic review and following an Institute of Medicine-compliant process to ensure transparency and patient engagement. Recommendations were supported by structured rationales, integrating evidence from the systematic review, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences from evidence. RESULTS: There is evidence to support the efficacy of the use of ibuprofen, acetaminophen (in children and adolescents), and triptans (mainly in adolescents) for the relief of migraine pain, although confidence in the evidence varies between agents. There is high confidence that adolescents receiving oral sumatriptan/naproxen and zolmitriptan nasal spray are more likely to be headache-free at 2 hours than those receiving placebo. No acute treatments were effective for migraine-related nausea or vomiting; some triptans were effective for migraine-related phonophobia and photophobia. RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations for the treatment of acute migraine in children and adolescents focus on the importance of early treatment, choosing the route of administration best suited to the characteristics of the individual migraine attack, and providing counseling on lifestyle factors that can exacerbate migraine, including trigger avoidance and medication overuse.

Practice guideline update summary: Efficacy and tolerability of the new antiepileptic drugs I: Treatment of new-onset epilepsy: Report of the American Epilepsy Society and the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

Objective: To update the 2004 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline for treating new-onset focal or generalized epilepsy (GE) with second- and third-generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Methods: The 2004 AAN criteria was used to systematically review literature (January 2003 to November 2015), classify pertinent studies according to the therapeutic rating scheme, and link recommendations to evidence strength. Results: Several second-generation AEDs are effective for new-onset focal epilepsy. Data are lacking on efficacy in new-onset generalized tonic-clonic seizures, juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, or juvenile absence epilepsy, and on efficacy of third-generation AEDs in new-onset epilepsy. Recommendations: Lamotrigine (LTG) should (Level B) and levetiracetam (LEV) and zonisamide (ZNS) may (Level C) be considered in decreasing seizure frequency in adults with new-onset focal epilepsy. LTG should (Level B) and gabapentin (GBP) may (Level C) be considered in decreasing seizure frequency in patients ≥60 years with new-onset focal epilepsy. Unless there are compelling adverse-effect-related concerns, ethosuximide (ETS) or valproic acid (VPA) should be considered before LTG to decrease seizure frequency in treating absence seizures in childhood absence epilepsy (Level B). No high-quality studies suggest clobazam, eslicarbazepine, ezogabine, felbamate, GBP, lacosamide, LEV, LTG, oxcarbazepine, perampanel, pregabalin, rufinamide, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin, or ZNS is effective in treating new-onset epilepsy because no high-quality studies exist in adults of various ages. A recent FDA strategy allows extrapolation of efficacy across populations; therefore, for focal epilepsy, eslicarbazepine and lacosamide (oral only for pediatric use) as add-on or monotherapy in persons ≥4 years old and perampanel as monotherapy received FDA approval.

Practice guideline update summary: Efficacy and tolerability of the new antiepileptic drugs II: Treatment-resistant epilepsy: Report of the American Epilepsy Society and the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

Objective: To update the 2004 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline for managing treatment-resistant (TR) epilepsy with second- and third-generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Methods: 2004 criteria were used to systematically review literature (January 2003 to November 2015), classify pertinent studies according to the therapeutic rating scheme, and link recommendations to evidence strength. Results: Forty-two articles were included. Recommendations: The following are established as effective to reduce seizure frequency (Level A): immediate-release pregabalin and perampanel for TR adult focal epilepsy (TRAFE); vigabatrin for TRAFE (not first-line treatment; rufinamide for Lennox-Gastuat syndrome (LGS) (add-on therapy). The following should be considered to decrease seizure frequency (Level B): lacosamide, eslicarbazepine, and extended-release topiramate for TRAFE (ezogabine production discontinued); immediate- and extended-release lamotrigine for generalized epilepsy with TR generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizures in adults; levetiracetam (add-on therapy) for TR childhood focal epilepsy (TRCFE) (1 month to 16 years), TR GTC seizures, and TR juvenile myoclonic epilepsy; clobazam for LGS (add-on therapy); zonisamide for TRCFE (6-17 years); oxcarbazepine for TRCFE (1 month to 4 years). The text presents Level C recommendations. AED selection depends on seizure/syndrome type, patient age, concomitant medications, and AED tolerability, safety, and efficacy. This evidence-based assessment informs AED prescription guidelines for TR epilepsy and indicates seizure types and syndromes needing more evidence. A recent FDA strategy allows extrapolation of efficacy across populations; therefore, for focal epilepsy, eslicarbazepine and lacosamide (oral only for pediatric use) as add-on or monotherapy in persons ≥4 years of age and perampanel as monotherapy received FDA approval.

Practice guideline update summary: Efficacy and tolerability of the new antiepileptic drugs I: Treatment of new-onset epilepsy: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society.

OBJECTIVE: To update the 2004 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline for treating new-onset focal or generalized epilepsy with second- and third-generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHODS: The 2004 AAN criteria were used to systematically review literature (January 2003-November 2015), classify pertinent studies according to the therapeutic rating scheme, and link recommendations to evidence strength. RESULTS: Several second-generation AEDs are effective for new-onset focal epilepsy. Data are lacking on efficacy in new-onset generalized tonic-clonic seizures, juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, or juvenile absence epilepsy, and on efficacy of third-generation AEDs in new-onset epilepsy. RECOMMENDATIONS: Lamotrigine (LTG) should (Level B) and levetiracetam (LEV) and zonisamide (ZNS) may (Level C) be considered in decreasing seizure frequency in adults with new-onset focal epilepsy. LTG should (Level B) and gabapentin (GBP) may (Level C) be considered in decreasing seizure frequency in patients ≥60 years of age with new-onset focal epilepsy. Unless there are compelling adverse effect-related concerns, ethosuximide or valproic acid should be considered before LTG to decrease seizure frequency in treating absence seizures in childhood absence epilepsy (level B). No high-quality studies suggest clobazam, eslicarbazepine, ezogabine, felbamate, GBP, lacosamide, LEV, LTG, oxcarbazepine, perampanel, pregabalin, rufinamide, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin, or ZNS is effective in treating new-onset epilepsy because no high-quality studies exist in adults of various ages. A recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) strategy allows extrapolation of efficacy across populations; therefore, for focal epilepsy, eslicarbazepine and lacosamide (oral only for pediatric use) as add-on or monotherapy in persons ≥4 years old and perampanel as monotherapy received FDA approval.