Cornelia Drees’s research while affiliated with Mayo Clinic and other places

INTRODUCTION Responsive neurostimulation (RNS) is efficacious in treating medically refractory epilepsy arising from neocortical foci. During clinical trials, most patients with neocortical seizure foci received cortical strip leads, perhaps due to intracranial monitoring with subdural grids/strips. Stereo-electroencephalography (sEEG) has become more widely utilized since the trials, resulting in increased placement of neocortical RNS depth leads. This is also an appealing approach when dural adhesions make strip lead implantation difficult. METHODS We conducted retrospective chart review of adult patients with refractory epilepsy at seven institutions who underwent placement and connection of at least one RNS depth lead in the neocortex. RESULTS 61 neocortical depth leads were connected to the RNS neurostimulator in 53 patients. 33 patients had additional depth leads in a non-neocortical focus, and 12 had an additional neocortical strip lead. Median follow-up was 2.2 years (range: 0.4 – 5.2 years). Median clinical seizure reduction in seizures was 63% at 1 y and 75% at last follow-up. 12 patients (23%) were seizure-free at last follow-up; a majority of these (83%) were seizure-free for >6 mo, with five patients seizure-free for >1 y. There were two (3.8%) scalp infections. One patient (1.9%) had each of the following: chemical meningitis, epidural hematoma, post-surgical status epilepticus (resolved with stimulation), new-onset non-epileptic seizures, and stimulation-related nausea (resolved with programming). CONCLUSIONS Our multicenter series of 53 patients with neocortical-onset epilepsy treated with neocortical RNS depth leads demonstrated 75% median seizure reduction at 2 y of follow-up with a similar safety profile to placement of deep brain electrodes for movement disorders. Neocortical depth leads may be preferred with the RNS system following sEEG evaluation and/or if strip placement poses increased surgical risk.

Objective: Drug-resistant epilepsy can be difficult to cure and may pose emotional challenges for epilepsy providers. Neuropalliative care (NPC) can augment quality of life (QOL) in persons with neurological diseases and may add meaningful elements to the treatment repertoire of epilepsy specialists even if seizures continue. However, NPC has not been widely implemented in epilepsy. Our study aimed to determine whether physicians of persons with drug-resistant epilepsy (PWDRE) experience distress when faced with treatment failure (Engel class ≥ 2), either failure of medications-only (PWDREmo) or of both medications and surgery (procedures with curative intent (PWDREms)). Furthermore, we evaluated physician knowledge about and referrals to NPC following treatment failures to help improve patient QOL despite ongoing seizures. Methods: An anonymous online survey was distributed to US epilepsy physicians through the American Epilepsy Society website and personal email to assess levels of distress experienced when caring for PWDREmo and PWDREms (7-point Likert scale ["1" = "no distress", "7" = "most distress ever felt"]), and knowledge and use of NPC. Results: Eighty-two physicians completed the survey. Most experienced distress when epilepsy treatments failed: 59% felt moderate distress (≥4) with PWDREmo (median "4", mean 3.74, range 1-7), 90% suffered moderate to severe distress (5, 5.17, 1-7) with PWDREms. Distress over PWDREms was significantly greater than distress over PWDREmo (p < 0.0001). Forty-three percent reported confidence in their knowledge about NPC. Only 15% were likely to refer PWDREmo to NPC, while 44% would consider it for PWDREms. Conclusion: Among survey responders, physician distress was high when confronted with treatment failures, especially the failure of epilepsy surgery. Fewer than half of responders were likely to refer patients to NPC. Further research is necessary to determine extent, reasons, and effects of physician distress and whether improved understanding of and patient access to NPC would help alleviate physician distress when faced with treatment failures in PWDRE.

Objective Clinical trials of a brain-responsive neurostimulator, RNS® System (RNS), excluded patients with a vagus nerve stimulator, VNS® System (VNS). The goal of this study was to evaluate seizure outcomes and safety of concurrent RNS and VNS stimulation in adults with drug-resistant focal-onset seizures. Methods A retrospective multicenter chart review was performed on all patients with an active VNS and RNS who were treated for a minimum of 6 months with both systems concurrently. Frequency of disabling seizures at baseline before RNS, at 1 year after RNS placement, and at last follow-up were used to calculate the change in seizure frequency after treatment. Data on adverse events and complications related to each device were collected. Results Sixty-four patients from 10 epilepsy centers met inclusion criteria. All but one patient received RNS after VNS. The median follow-up time after RNS implantation was 28 months. Analysis of the entire population of patients with active VNS and RNS systems revealed a median reduction in seizure frequency at 1 year post-RNS placement of 43% with a responder rate of 49%, and at last follow-up a 64% median reduction with a 67% responder rate. No negative interactions were reported from the concurrent use of VNS and RNS. Stimulation-related side-effects were reported more frequently in association with VNS (30%) than with RNS (2%). Significance Our findings suggest that concurrent treatment with VNS and RNS is safe and that the addition of RNS to VNS can further reduce seizure frequency.

Background: Corpus callosotomy for medically intractable epilepsy is an effective ablative procedure traditionally achieved using either standard open craniotomy or with less-invasive approaches. Advances in robotic-assisted stereotactic guidance for neurosurgery can be applied for LITT for corpus callosotomy. Clinical presentations: Two patients were included in this study. One was a 25-year-old female patient with extensive bi-hemispheric malformations of cortical development and medically refractory epilepsy, and the other was an 18-year-old male with medically refractory epilepsy and atonic seizures, who underwent a complete corpus callosotomy using robotic-assisted stereotactic guidance for LITT. Results: Both patients underwent successful intended corpus callosotomy with volumetric analysis demonstrating a length disconnection of 74% and a volume disconnection of 55% for patient 1 and a length disconnection of 83% and a volume disconnection of 33% for patient 2. Postoperatively, both patients had clinical reductions in seizure. Conclusion: Our experience demonstrates that robotic guidance systems can safely and effectively be adapted for minimally invasive LITT corpus callosotomy.

Parry–Romberg syndrome (PRS) and linear sclerosis en coup de sabre (LScs) are rare, related, autoimmune conditions of focal atrophy and sclerosis of head and face which are associated with the development of focal epilepsy. The scarcity of PRS and LScs cases has made an evidence-based approach to optimal treatment of seizures difficult. Here we present a large systematic review of the literature evaluating 137 cases of PRS or LScs, as well as three new cases with epilepsy that span the spectrum of severity, treatments, and outcomes in these syndromes. Analysis showed that intracranial abnormalities and epileptic foci localized ipsilateral to the external (skin, eye, mouth) manifestations by imaging or EEG in 92% and 80% of cases, respectively. Epilepsy developed before external abnormalities in 19% of cases and after external disease onset in 66% of cases, with decreasing risk the further from the start of external symptoms. We found that over half of individuals affected may achieve seizure freedom with anti-seizure medications (ASMs) alone or in combination with immunomodulatory therapy (IMT), while a smaller number of individuals benefitted from epilepsy surgery. Although analysis of case reports has the risk of bias or omission, this is currently the best source of clinical information on epilepsy in PRS/LScs-spectrum disease. The paucity of higher quality information requires improved case identification and tracking. Toward this effort, all data have been deposited in a Synapse.org database for case collection with the potential for international collaboration.

Objective Recording seizures using personal seizure diaries can be challenging during everyday life and many seizures are missed or mis-reported. People living with epilepsy could benefit by having a more accurate and objective wearable EEG system for counting seizures that can be used outside of the hospital. The objective of this study was to (1) determine which seizure types can be electrographically recorded from the scalp below the hairline, (2) determine epileptologists’ ability to identify electrographic seizures from single-channels extracted from full-montage wired-EEG, and (3) determine epileptologists’ ability to identify electrographic seizures from Epilog, a wireless single-channel EEG sensor. Methods Epilog sensors were worn concurrently during epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) monitoring. During standard-of-care review, epileptologists were asked if the electrographic portion of the seizure was visible on single channels of wired electrodes at locations proximal to Epilog sensors, and if focal-onset, which electrode was closest to the focus. From these locations, single channels of EEG extracted from wired full-montage EEG and the proximal Epilog sensor were presented to 3 blinded epileptologists along with markers for when known seizures occurred (taken from the standard-of-care review). Control segments at inter-ictal times were included as control. The epileptologists were asked whether a seizure event was visible in the single channel EEG record at or near the marker. Results A total of 75 seizures were recorded from 22 of 40 adults that wore Epilog during their visit to the EMU. Epileptologists were able to visualize known seizure activity on at least one of the wired electrodes proximal to Epilog sensors for all seizure events. Epileptologists accurately identified seizures in 71% of Epilog recordings and 84% of single-channel wired recordings and were 92% accurate identifying seizures with Epilog when those seizures ended in a clinical convulsion compared to those that did not (>55%). Conclusions Epileptologists are able to visualize seizure activity on single-channels of EEG at locations where Epilog sensors are easily placed on the scalp below hairline. Manual review of seizure annotations can be done quickly and accurately (>70% TP and >98% PPV) on single-channel EEG data. Reviewing single-channel EEG is more accurate than what has been reported in the literature on self-reporting seizures in seizure diaries, the current standard of care for seizure counting outside of the EMU. Significance Wearable EEG will be important for seizure monitoring outside of the hospital. Epileptologists can accurately identify seizures in single-channel EEG, better than patient self-reporting in diaries based on the literature. Automated or semi-automated seizure detection on single channels of EEG could be used in the future to objectively count seizures to complement the standard of care outside of the EMU without the overt burden upon epileptologist review.