Neuropsychiatric complications of coronavirus disease 2019: Mount Sinai Health System cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the frequency of neuropsychiatric complications among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and their association with pre-existing comorbidities and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients hospitalized with COVID-19 within a large multicenter New York City health system between March 15, 2020 and May 17, 2021 and randomly selected a representative cohort for detailed chart review. Clinical data, including the occurrence of neuropsychiatric complications (categorized as either altered mental status [AMS] or other neuropsychiatric complications) and in-hospital mortality, were extracted using an electronic medical record database and individual chart review. Associations between neuropsychiatric complications, comorbidities, laboratory findings, and in-hospital mortality were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Our study cohort consisted of 974 patients, the majority were admitted during the first wave of the pandemic. Patients were treated with anticoagulation (88.4%), glucocorticoids (24.8%), and remdesivir (10.5%); 18.6% experienced severe COVID-19 pneumonia (evidenced by ventilator requirement). Neuropsychiatric complications occurred in 58.8% of patients; 39.8% experienced AMS; and 19.0% experienced at least one other complication (seizures in 1.4%, ischemic stroke in 1.6%, hemorrhagic stroke in 1.0%) or symptom (headache in 11.4%, anxiety in 6.8%, ataxia in 6.3%). Higher odds of mortality, which occurred in 22.0%, were associated with AMS, ventilator support, increasing age, and higher serum inflammatory marker levels. Anticoagulant therapy was associated with lower odds of mortality and AMS. CONCLUSION: Neuropsychiatric complications of COVID-19, especially AMS, were common, varied, and associated with in-hospital mortality in a diverse multicenter cohort at an epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Disparities in Teleneurology Use in Medicaid Beneficiaries With Epilepsy by Practice Setting: Promoting Health Equity in Academic Centers.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medicaid beneficiaries in many American academic medical centers can receive care in a separate facility than those not covered by Medicaid. We aimed to identify possible disparities in care by evaluating the association between facility type (integrated faculty practice or Medicaid-only outpatient clinic) and telehealth utilization in people with epilepsy. METHODS: We performed retrospective analyses using structured data from the Mount Sinai Health System electronic medical record data from January 2003 to August 2021. We identified people of all ages with epilepsy who were followed by an epileptologist after January 3, 2018, using a validated ICD-9-CM/10-CM coded case definition. We evaluated associations between practice setting and telehealth utilization, an outcome measure that captures the evolving delivery of neurologic care in a post-coronavirus disease 2019 era, using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 4,586 people with epilepsy seen by an epileptologist, including Medicaid beneficiaries in the Medicaid outpatient clinic (N = 387), Medicaid beneficiaries in the faculty practice after integration (N = 723), and non-Medicaid beneficiaries (N = 3,476). Patients not insured by Medicaid were significantly older (average age 40 years vs 29 in persons seen in Medicaid-only outpatient clinic and 28.5 in persons insured with Medicaid seen in faculty practice [p < 0.0001]). Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to have drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), with 51.94% of people seen in Medicaid-only outpatient clinic, 41.63% of Medicaid beneficiaries seen in faculty practice, and 37.2% of non-Medicaid beneficiaries having DRE (p < 0.0001). Medicaid outpatient clinic patients were less likely to have telehealth visits (phone or video); 81.65% of patients in the Medicaid outpatient clinic having no telehealth visits vs 71.78% of Medicaid beneficiaries in the faculty practice and 70.89% of non-Medicaid beneficiaries (p < 0.0001). In an adjusted logistic regression analysis, Medicaid beneficiaries had lower odds (0.61; 95% CI 0.46-0.81) of using teleneurology compared with all patients seen in faculty practice (p = 0.0005). DISCUSSION: Compared with the Medicaid-only outpatient clinic, we found higher telehealth utilization in the integrated faculty practice with no difference by insurance status (Medicaid vs other). Integrated care may be associated with better health care delivery in people with epilepsy; thus, future research should examine its impact on other epilepsy-related outcomes.

Association of New-Onset Seizures With SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Seizures have been reported as an adverse effect of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. However, no study has answered the question of whether there is any association between seizures in the general population and COVID-19 vaccination. Objective: To evaluate the seizure incidence among SARS-CoV-2 vaccine recipients compared with those who received a placebo. Data Sources: A systematic search of MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, review publications, editorials, letters to editors, and conference papers, along with the references of the included studies from December 2019 to July 7, 2023. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting seizure incidence with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework and used the Mantel-Haenszel method with random- and common-effect models. The risk of bias of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane assessment tool for RCTs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome of interest was new-onset seizure incidence proportion compared among (1) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine recipients and (2) placebo recipients. Results: Six RCTs were included in the study. Results of the pooled analysis comparing the incidence of new-onset seizure between the 63 521 vaccine and 54 919 placebo recipients in the 28-day follow-up after vaccine/placebo injection showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (9 events [0.014%] in vaccine and 1 event [0.002%] in placebo recipients; odds ratio [OR], 2.70; 95% CI, 0.76-9.57; P = .12; I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, Cochran Q P = .74). Likewise, in the entire blinded-phase period after injection, with a median of more than 43 days, no significant difference was identified between the vaccine and placebo groups regarding incident new-onset seizure (13/43 724 events [0.03%] in vaccine and 5/40 612 [0.012%] in placebo recipients; OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.86-3.23, P > .99, I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, Cochran Q P = .95). Conclusions and Relevance: According to this systematic review and meta-analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of new-onset seizure incidence between vaccinated individuals and placebo recipients.

Responsive Neurostimulation for People With Drug-Resistant Epilepsy and Autism Spectrum Disorder.

PURPOSE: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have comorbid epilepsy at much higher rates than the general population, and about 30% will be refractory to medication. Patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) should be referred for surgical evaluation, yet many with ASD and DRE are not resective surgical candidates. The aim of this study was to examine the response of this population to the responsive neurostimulator (RNS) System. METHODS: This multicenter study evaluated patients with ASD and DRE who underwent RNS System placement. Patients were included if they had the RNS System placed for 1 year or more. Seizure reduction and behavioral outcomes were reported. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. RESULTS: Nineteen patients with ASD and DRE had the RNS System placed at 5 centers. Patients were between the ages of 11 and 29 (median 20) years. Fourteen patients were male, whereas five were female. The device was implanted from 1 to 5 years. Sixty-three percent of all patients experienced a >50% seizure reduction, with 21% of those patients being classified as super responders (seizure reduction >90%). For the super responders, two of the four patients had the device implanted for >2 years. The response rate was 70% for those in whom the device was implanted for >2 years. Improvements in behaviors as measured by the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement scale were noted in 79%. No complications from the surgery were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the authors' experience in this small cohort of patients, the RNS System seems to be a promising surgical option in people with ASD-DRE.

Older adults with epilepsy and COVID-19: Outcomes in a multi-hospital health system.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high rates of mortality and morbidity in older adults, especially those with pre-existing conditions. There is little work investigating how neurological conditions affect older adults with COVID-19. We aimed to compare in-hospital outcomes, including mortality, in older adults with and without epilepsy. METHODS: This retrospective study in a large multicenter New York health system included consecutive older patients (age ≥65 years) either with or without epilepsy who were admitted with COVID-19 between 3/2020-5/2021. Epilepsy was identified using a validated International Classification of Disease (ICD) and antiseizure medicationbased case definition. Univariate comparisons were calculated using Chi-square, Fisher's exact, Mann-Whitney U, or Student's t-tests. Multivariable logistic regression models were generated to examine factors associated with mortality, discharge disposition and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: We identified 5384 older adults admitted with COVID-19 of whom 173 (3.21 %) had epilepsy. Mean age was significantly lower in those with (75.44, standard deviation (SD): 7.23) compared to those without epilepsy (77.98, SD: 8.68, p = 0.007). Older adults with epilepsy were more likely to be ventilated (35.84 % vs. 16.18 %, p < 0.001), less likely to be discharged home (21.39 % vs. 43.12 %, p < 0.001), had longer median LOS (13 days vs. 8 days, p < 0.001), and had higher in-hospital death (35.84 % vs. 28.29 %, p = 0.030) compared to those without epilepsy. Epilepsy in older adults was associated with increased odds of in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.55; 95 % CI 1.12-2.14, p = 0.032), non-routine discharge disposition (aOR, 3.34; 95 % CI 2.21-5.03, p < 0.001), and longer LOS (46.46 % 95 % CI 34 %-59 %, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In models that adjusted for multiple confounders including comorbidity and age, our study found that epilepsy was still associated with higher in-hospital mortality, longer LOS and worse discharge dispositions in older adults with COVID-19 higher in-hospital mortality, longer LOS and worse discharge dispositions in older adults with COVID-19. This work reinforces that epilepsy is a risk factor for worse outcomes in older adults admitted with COVID-19. Timely identification and treatment of COVID-19 in epilepsy may improve outcomes in older people with epilepsy.

Efficacy of Occipital Nerve Stimulation in Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are a group of highly disabling primary headache disorders. Although pharmacological treatments exist, they are not always effective or well tolerated. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a potentially effective surgical treatment. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the efficacy of ONS in treating TACs. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Primary outcomes were reduction in headache intensity, duration, and frequency. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rate and reduction in medication use. Because of large differences in outcome measures, data for patients suffering from short-lasting, unilateral, and neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) and cranial autonomic symptoms (SUNA) were reported separately. Risk of bias was assessed using the NIH Quality Assessment Tools. RESULTS: A total of 417 patients from 14 published papers were included in the analysis, of which 15 patients were in the SUNCT/SUNA cohort. The mean reduction in headache intensity and duration was 26.2% and 31.4%, respectively. There was a mean reduction in headache frequency of 50%, as well as a 61.2% reduction in the use of abortive medications and a 31.1% reduction in the use of prophylactic medications. In the SUNCT/SUNA cohort, the mean decrease in headache intensity and duration was 56.8% and 42.8%. The overall responder rate, defined as a >50% reduction in attack frequency, was 60.8% for the non-SUNCT/non-SUNA cohort and 66.7% for the SUNCT/SUNA cohort. Adverse events requiring repeat surgery were reported in 33% of cases. Risk of bias assessment suggests that articles included in this review had reasonable internal validity. CONCLUSION: ONS may be an effective surgical treatment for approximately two thirds of patients with medically refractory TACs.

Association of seizure with COVID-19 vaccines in persons with epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Seizure aggravation following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines is a major cause behind vaccine hesitancy among persons with epilepsy (PwE), resulting in lower immunization rates. We systematically reviewed seizure-activity-related events in PwE following COVID-19 vaccination. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, until January 31, 2023, and included articles reporting seizure activity-related events in PwE receiving COVID-19 vaccination. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses were followed. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022312475). Outcomes included pooled incidence proportions of (a) increased seizure frequency, (b) status epilepticus (SE), and (c) change in seizure type. Of the 2207 studies, 16 entered the meta-analysis. The pooled incidence proportion of increased seizure frequency (16 studies-3245 PwE) was 5% (95% CI: 3%-7%, I2 = 52%). Regarding increased seizure frequency, no significant difference was observed between mRNA and viral vector (OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.49-2.52, I2 = 0%), and between mRNA and inactivated virus (OR: 1.60, 95% CI: 0.27-9.37; I2 = 0%). The pooled incidence proportion of SE (15 studies-2387 PwE) was 0.08% (95% CI: 0.02%-0.33%, I2 = 0%). Ultimately, the pooled incidence proportion of change in seizure type (7 studies-1172 PwE) was 1% (95% CI: 1%-2%, I2 = 0%). The meta-analysis revealed post-COVID-19-vaccination increased seizure frequency in 5% of PwE, with no difference between mRNA and viral vector or inactivated virus vaccines. Furthermore, we found 0.08% and 1% incidence proportions for postvaccination SE and change in seizure type, respectively. While noteworthy, these values are far less than reports for COVID-19 infection, emphasizing vaccination importance in preventing COVID-19 consequences in PwE.

Comparing vagus nerve stimulation and resective surgery outcomes in patients with co-occurring autism and epilepsy to patients with epilepsy alone: A population-based study.

Autism and epilepsy commonly co-occur. Understanding trends in healthcare utilization and in-hospital outcomes amongst patients with autism and epilepsy can help optimize care and reduce costs. We compared hospital outcomes amongst patients with autism and epilepsy to those with epilepsy alone undergoing vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and resective/disconnective surgery. Differences in discharge status, in-hospital mortality, mean length of stay (LOS), cost and surgical/medical complications were examined. Elective surgical admissions amongst patients with epilepsy alone and co-occurring autism and epilepsy were identified in the 2003-14 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) using previously validated ICD-9-CM case definitions. One patient with co-occurring epilepsy and autism was matched to three epilepsy patients for age, sex and (1) VNS and (2) resective/disconnective surgery. Multinomial logistic regressions were performed to examine the outcomes of interest. Data were collected on: (1) VNS-52 (mean age: 12.79 ± 1.03; 19.27% female) hospital admissions in persons with comorbid autism and epilepsy, 156 (mean age: 12.84 ± 0.71; 19.31% female) matched controls with epilepsy alone; (2) resective/disconnective surgery-113 (mean age: 12.99 ± 0.84; 24.55% female) with comorbid autism and epilepsy, 339 (mean age: 13.37 ± 0.68; 23.86% female) matched controls with epilepsy alone. Compared to patients with epilepsy alone, patients with autism and epilepsy who underwent either surgery showed no differences for in-hospital mortality, discharge status, mean LOS, hospitalization cost, and surgical/medical complications. Our study shows the feasibility and safety of epilepsy VNS and resective surgery in those with ASD do not differ with those with epilepsy alone, contrary to the prevalent safety concerns of epilepsy surgery in patients with ASD.

Sensitivity and specificity of alternative screening methods for systematic reviews using text mining tools.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of text mining (TM) on the sensitivity and specificity of title and abstract screening strategies for systematic reviews (SRs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Twenty reviewers each evaluated a 500-citation set. We compared five screening methods: conventional double screen (CDS), single screen, double screen with TM, combined double screen and single screen with TM, and single screen with TM. Rayyan, Abstrackr, and SWIFT-Review were used for each TM method. The results of a published SR were used as the reference standard. RESULTS: The mean sensitivity and specificity achieved by CDS were 97.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 94.7, 99.3) and 95.0% (95% CI: 93.0, 97.1). When compared with single screen, CDS provided a greater sensitivity without a decrease in specificity. Rayyan, Abstrackr, and SWIFT-Review identified all relevant studies. Specificity was often higher for TM-assisted methods than that for CDS, although with mean differences of only one-to-two percentage points. For every 500 citations not requiring manual screening, 216 minutes (95% CI: 169, 264) could be saved. CONCLUSION: TM-assisted screening methods resulted in similar sensitivity and modestly improved specificity as compared to CDS. The time saved with TM makes this a promising new tool for SR.

In-hospital outcomes in patients with and without epilepsy diagnosed with COVID-19-A cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with mortality in persons with comorbidities. The aim of this study was to evaluate in-hospital outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with and without epilepsy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with COVID-19 admitted to a multicenter health system between March 15, 2020, and May 17, 2021. Patients with epilepsy were identified using a validated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM)/ICD-10-CM case definition. Logistic regression models and Kaplan-Meier analyses were conducted for mortality and non-routine discharges (i.e., not discharged home). An ordinary least-squares regression model was fitted for length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: We identified 9833 people with COVID-19 including 334 with epilepsy. On univariate analysis, people with epilepsy had significantly higher ventilator use (37.70% vs 14.30%, p < .001), intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (39.20% vs 17.70%, p < .001) mortality rate (29.60% vs 19.90%, p < .001), and longer LOS (12 days vs 7 days, p < .001). and fewer were discharged home (29.64% vs 57.37%, p < .001). On multivariate analysis, only non-routine discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.00-3.70; p < .001) and LOS (32.50% longer, 95% CI 22.20%-43.60%; p < .001) were significantly different. Factors associated with higher odds of mortality in epilepsy were older age (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08; p < .001), ventilator support (aOR 7.18, 95% CI 3.12-16.48; p < .001), and higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.34; p = .010). In epilepsy, admissions between August and December 2020 or January and May 2021 were associated with a lower odds of non-routine discharge and decreased LOS compared to admissions between March and July 2020, but this difference was not statistically significant. SIGNIFICANCE: People with COVID-19 who had epilepsy had a higher odds of non-routine discharge and longer LOS but not higher mortality. Older age (≥65), ventilator use, and higher CCI were associated with COVID-19 mortality in epilepsy. This suggests that older adults with epilepsy and multimorbidity are more vulnerable than those without and should be monitored closely in the setting of COVID-19.

Association of first anti-seizure medication choice with injuries in older adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy incidence increases exponentially in older adults, who are also at higher risk of adverse drug effects. Anti-seizure medications (ASM) may be associated with sedation and injuries, but discontinuation can result in seizures. We sought to determine whether there was an association between prescribing non-guideline concordant ASM and subsequent injury as this could inform care models. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adults 50 years or older with newly-diagnosed epilepsy in 2015-16, sampled from the MarketScan Databases. The outcome of interest was injury within 1-year of ASM prescription (e.g., burns, falls) and the exposure of interest was ASM category (recommended vs. not recommended by clinical guidelines). Descriptive statistics characterized covariates and a multivariable Cox-regression model was built to examine the association between ASM category and subsequent injury. RESULTS: 5,931 people with newly diagnosed epilepsy were prescribed an ASM within 1-year. The three most common ASMs were: levetiracetam (62.86%), gabapentin (11.73%), and phenytoin (4.45%). Multivariable Cox-regression found that medication category was not associated with injury; however, older age (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 1.01/year), history of prior injury (AHR 1.77), traumatic brain injury (AHR 1.55) and ASM polypharmacy (AHR 1.32) were associated with increased hazard of injury. CONCLUSIONS: Most older adults appear to be getting appropriate first prescriptions for epilepsy. However, a substantial proportion still receives medication that guidelines suggest avoiding. In addition, we show that ASM polypharmacy is associated with an increased hazard of injury within 1- year. Efforts to improve prescribing in older adults with epilepsy should consider how to reduce. both polypharmacy and exposure to medications that guidelines recommend avoiding.

Seizure onset patterns predict outcome after stereo-electroencephalography-guided laser amygdalohippocampotomy.

OBJECTIVE: Stereotactic laser amygdalohippocampotomy (SLAH) is an appealing option for patients with temporal lobe epilepsy, who often require intracranial monitoring to confirm mesial temporal seizure onset. However, given limited spatial sampling, it is possible that stereotactic electroencephalography (stereo-EEG) may miss seizure onset elsewhere. We hypothesized that stereo-EEG seizure onset patterns (SOPs) may differentiate between primary onset and secondary spread and predict postoperative seizure control. In this study, we characterized the 2-year outcomes of patients who underwent single-fiber SLAH after stereo-EEG and evaluated whether stereo-EEG SOPs predict postoperative seizure freedom. METHODS: This retrospective five-center study included patients with or without mesial temporal sclerosis (MTS) who underwent stereo-EEG followed by single-fiber SLAH between August 2014 and January 2022. Patients with causative hippocampal lesions apart from MTS or for whom the SLAH was considered palliative were excluded. An SOP catalogue was developed based on literature review. The dominant pattern for each patient was used for survival analysis. The primary outcome was 2-year Engel I classification or recurrent seizures before then, stratified by SOP category. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were included, with a mean follow-up duration of 39 ± 12 months after SLAH. Overall 1-, 2-, and 3-year Engel I seizure freedom probability was 54%, 36%, and 33%, respectively. Patients with SOPs, including low-voltage fast activity or low-frequency repetitive spiking, had a 46% 2-year seizure freedom probability, compared to 0% for patients with alpha or theta frequency repetitive spiking or theta or delta frequency rhythmic slowing (log-rank test, p = .00015). SIGNIFICANCE: Patients who underwent SLAH after stereo-EEG had a low probability of seizure freedom at 2 years, but SOPs successfully predicted seizure recurrence in a subset of patients. This study provides proof of concept that SOPs distinguish between hippocampal seizure onset and spread and supports using SOPs to improve selection of SLAH candidates.

Complications of Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease and Relationship between Micro-electrode tracks and hemorrhage: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation is a common treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD). Despite strong efficacy in well-selected patients, complications can occur. Intraoperative micro-electrode recording (MER) can enhance efficacy by improving lead accuracy. However, there is controversy as to whether MER increases risk of hemorrhage. OBJECTIVES: To provide a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis reporting complication rates from deep brain stimulation in PD. We also interrogate the association between hemorrhage and MER. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were implemented while querying the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. All included studies were randomized controlled trials and prospective case series with 5 or more patients. Primary outcomes included rates of overall revision, infection, lead malposition, surgical site and wound complications, hardware-related complications, and seizure. The secondary outcome was the relationship between number of MER tracks and hemorrhage rate. RESULTS: 262 articles with 21,261 patients were included in the analysis. Mean follow-up was 25.8 months (range 0-133). Complication rates were: revision 4.9%, infection 4.2%, lead malposition 3.3%, surgical site complications 2.8%, hemorrhage 2.4%, hardware-related complications 2.4%, and seizure 1.9%. While hemorrhage rate did not increase with single-track MER (odds ratio, 3.49; P = 0.29), there was a significant non-linear increase with each additional track. CONCLUSION: Infection and lead malposition were the most common complications. Hemorrhage risk increases with more than one MER track. These results highlight the challenge of balancing surgical accuracy and perioperative risk.

Autism Spectrum Disorder and Epilepsy.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), was first described in 1943 as a disorder consisting of a triad of qualitative impairments of social interaction, communication and restricted repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, and activities. The relationship between ASD and epilepsy is well documented. Patients with ASD have an increased risk of epilepsy, while those with epilepsy have a higher risk of ASD, as compared with the general population. Diagnosing epilepsy in those with ASD can be challenging. For example, stereotyped behaviors could be mistaken as ASD stereotypies, when in fact, they may be due to seizures. Fortunately, in recent years, we have gained a better understanding of the best antiseizure medications (ASMs) to use in this vulnerable population. However, more studies are needed to understand how best to screen for ASD in epilepsy, what the various ASD phenotypes are in people with epilepsy, especially those due to de novo genes/mutations, as well as factors influencing the fluctuating nature of ASD symptoms (eg, seizure type, frequency, syndromes, ASMs)..

Timing of referral to evaluate for epilepsy surgery: Expert Consensus Recommendations from the Surgical Therapies Commission of the International League Against Epilepsy.

Epilepsy surgery is the treatment of choice for patients with drug-resistant seizures. A timely evaluation for surgical candidacy can be life-saving for patients who are identified as appropriate surgical candidates, and may also enhance the care of nonsurgical candidates through improvement in diagnosis, optimization of therapy, and treatment of comorbidities. Yet, referral for surgical evaluations is often delayed while palliative options are pursued, with significant adverse consequences due to increased morbidity and mortality associated with intractable epilepsy. The Surgical Therapies Commission of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) sought to address these clinical gaps and clarify when to initiate a surgical evaluation. We conducted a Delphi consensus process with 61 epileptologists, epilepsy neurosurgeons, neurologists, neuropsychiatrists, and neuropsychologists with a median of 22 years in practice, from 28 countries in all six ILAE world regions. After three rounds of Delphi surveys, evaluating 51 unique scenarios, we reached the following Expert Consensus Recommendations: (1) Referral for a surgical evaluation should be offered to every patient with drug-resistant epilepsy (up to 70 years of age), as soon as drug resistance is ascertained, regardless of epilepsy duration, sex, socioeconomic status, seizure type, epilepsy type (including epileptic encephalopathies), localization, and comorbidities (including severe psychiatric comorbidity like psychogenic nonepileptic seizures [PNES] or substance abuse) if patients are cooperative with management; (2) A surgical referral should be considered for older patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who have no surgical contraindication, and for patients (adults and children) who are seizure-free on 1-2 antiseizure medications (ASMs) but have a brain lesion in noneloquent cortex; and (3) referral for surgery should not be offered to patients with active substance abuse who are noncooperative with management. We present the Delphi consensus results leading up to these Expert Consensus Recommendations and discuss the data supporting our conclusions. High level evidence will be required to permit creation of clinical practice guidelines.

Neurostimulation in people with drug-resistant epilepsy: Systematic review and meta-analysis from the ILAE Surgical Therapies Commission.

OBJECTIVE: Summarize the current evidence on efficacy and tolerability of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting standards and searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and their corresponding open-label extension studies, as well as prospective case series, with ≥20 participants (excluding studies limited to children). Our primary outcome was the mean (or median, when unavailable) percentage decrease in frequency, as compared to baseline, of all epileptic seizures at last follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of treatment responders and proportion with seizure freedom. RESULTS: We identified 30 eligible studies, six of which were RCTs. At long-term follow-up (mean 1.3 years), five observational studies for VNS reported a pooled mean percentage decrease in seizure frequency of 34.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.1, 74.5). In the open-label extension studies for RNS, the median seizure reduction was 53%, 66%, and 75% at 2, 5, and 9 years of follow-up, respectively. For DBS, the median reduction was 56%, 65%, and 75% at 2, 5, and 7 years, respectively. The proportion of individuals with seizure freedom at last follow-up increased significantly over time for DBS and RNS, whereas a positive trend was observed for VNS. Quality of life was improved in all modalities. The most common complications included hoarseness, and cough and throat pain for VNS and implant site pain, headache, and dysesthesia for DBS and RNS. SIGNIFICANCE: Neurostimulation modalities are an effective treatment option for drug-resistant epilepsy, with improving outcomes over time and few major complications. Seizure-reduction rates among the three therapies were similar during the initial blinded phase. Recent long-term follow-up studies are encouraging for RNS and DBS but are lacking for VNS.

Electroencephalography at the height of a pandemic: EEG findings in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize continuous video electroencephalogram (VEEG) findings of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients admitted at three New York City hospitals who underwent VEEG at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Demographics, comorbidities, neuroimaging, VEEG indications and findings, treatment, and outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Of 93 patients monitored, 77% had severe COVID-19 and 40% died. Acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke was present in 26% and 15%, respectively. Most common VEEG indications were encephalopathy/coma (60%) and seizure-like movements (38%). Most common VEEG findings were generalized slowing (97%), generalized attenuation (31%), generalized periodic discharges (17%) and generalized sharp waves (15%). Epileptiform abnormalities were present in 43% and seizures in 8% of patients, all of whom had seizure risk factors. Factors associated with an epileptiform VEEG included increasing age (OR 1.07, p = 0.001) and hepatic/renal failure (OR 2.99, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Most COVID-19 patients who underwent VEEG monitoring had severe COVID-19 and over one-third had acute cerebral injury (e.g., stroke, anoxia). Seizures were uncommon. VEEG findings were nonspecific. SIGNIFICANCE: VEEG findings in this cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients were those often seen in critical illness. Seizures were uncommon and occurred in the setting of common seizure risk factors.

The global cost of epilepsy: A systematic review and extrapolation.

OBJECTIVE: Global action for epilepsy requires information on the cost of epilepsy, which is currently unknown for most countries and regions of the world. To address this knowledge gap, the International League Against Epilepsy Commission on Epidemiology formed the Global Cost of Epilepsy Task Force. METHODS: We completed a systematic search of the epilepsy cost-of-illness literature and identified studies that provided a comprehensive set of direct health care and/or indirect costs, followed standard methods of case identification and cost estimation, and used data on a representative population or subpopulation of people with epilepsy. Country-specific costs per person with epilepsy were extracted and adjusted to generate an average cost per person in 2019 US dollars. For countries with no cost data, estimates were imputed based on average costs per person of similar income countries with data. Per person costs for each country were then applied to data on the prevalence of epilepsy from the Global Burden of Disease collaboration adjusted for the treatment gap. RESULTS: One hundred one cost-of-illness studies were included in the direct health care cost database, 74 from North America or Western Europe. Thirteen studies were used in the indirect cost database, eight from North America or Western Europe. The average annual cost per person with epilepsy in 2019 ranged from $204 in low-income countries to $11 432 in high-income countries based on this highly skewed database. The total cost of epilepsy, applying per person costs to the estimated 52.51 million people in the world with epilepsy and adjusting for the treatment gap, was $119.27 billion. SIGNIFICANCE: Based on a summary and extrapolations of this limited database, the global cost of epilepsy is substantial and highly concentrated in countries with well-developed health care systems, higher wages and income, limited treatment gaps, and a relatively small percentage of the epilepsy population.

Epilepsy-related stigma and attitudes: Systematic review of screening instruments and interventions - Report by the International League Against Epilepsy Task Force on Stigma in Epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: This is a systematic review aimed at summarizing the evidence related to instruments that have been developed to measure stigma or attitudes toward epilepsy and on stigma-reducing interventions. METHODS: This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards. A broad literature search (1985-2019) was performed in 13 databases. Articles were included if they described the development and testing of psychometric properties of an epilepsy-related stigma or attitude scale or stigma-reducing interventions. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, and extracted data. Basic descriptive statistics are reported. RESULTS: We identified 4234 abstracts, of which 893 were reviewed as full-text articles. Of these, 38 met inclusion criteria for an instrument development study and 30 as a stigma-reduction intervention study. Most instruments were initially developed using well-established methods and were tested in relatively large samples. Most intervention studies involved educational programs for adults with pre- and post-evaluations of attitudes toward people with epilepsy. Intervention studies often failed to use standardized instruments to quantify stigmatizing attitudes, were generally underpowered, and often found no evidence of benefit or the benefit was not sustained. Six intervention studies with stigma as the primary outcome had fewer design flaws and showed benefit. Very few or no instruments were validated for regional languages or culture, and there were very few interventions tested in some regions. SIGNIFICANCE: Investigators in regions without instruments should consider translating and further developing existing instruments rather than initiating the development of new instruments. Very few stigma-reduction intervention studies for epilepsy have been conducted, study methodology in general was poor, and standardized instruments were rarely used to measure outcomes. To accelerate the development of effective epilepsy stigma-reduction interventions, a paradigm shift from disease-specific, siloed trials to collaborative, cross-disciplinary platforms based upon unified theories of stigma transcending individual conditions will be needed.

Systematic review of frequency of felt and enacted stigma in epilepsy and determining factors and attitudes toward persons living with epilepsy-Report from the International League Against Epilepsy Task Force on Stigma in Epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence of felt and enacted stigma and attitudes toward persons living with epilepsy, and their determining factors. METHODS: Thirteen databases were searched (1985-2019). Abstracts were reviewed in duplicate and data were independently extracted using a standardized form. Studies were characterized using descriptive analysis by whether they addressed "felt" or "enacted" stigma and "attitudes" toward persons living with epilepsy. RESULTS: Of 4234 abstracts, 132 met eligibility criteria and addressed either felt or enacted stigma and 210 attitudes toward epilepsy. Stigma frequency ranged broadly between regions. Factors associated with enacted stigma included low level of knowledge about epilepsy, lower educational level, lower socioeconomic status, rural areas living, and religious grouping. Negative stereotypes were often internalized by persons with epilepsy, who saw themselves as having an "undesirable difference" and so anticipated being treated differently. Felt stigma was associated with increased risk of psychological difficulties and impaired quality of life. Felt stigma was linked to higher seizure frequency, recency of seizures, younger age at epilepsy onset or longer duration, lower educational level, poorer knowledge about epilepsy, and younger age. An important finding was the potential contribution of epilepsy terminology to the production of stigma. Negative attitudes toward those with epilepsy were described in 100% of included studies, and originated in any population group (students, teachers, healthcare professionals, general public, and those living with epilepsy). Better attitudes were generally noted in those of younger age or higher educational status. SIGNIFICANCE: Whatever the specific beliefs about epilepsy, implications for felt and enacted stigma show considerable commonality worldwide. Although some studies show improvement in attitudes toward those living with epilepsy over time, much work remains to be done to improve attitudes and understand the true occurrence of discrimination against persons with epilepsy.