Role of DESH, callosal angle and cingulate sulcus sign in prediction of gait responsiveness after shunting in iNPH patients.

Primary endpoint of this single-centre, prospective consecutive cohort study was to evaluate DESH score, CA, CSS and Evans index of suspected iNPH patients against the reference standard of lumbar infusion test (LIT) and external lumbar drainage (ELD) in prediction of gait response after VP shunt implantation in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). Patients were assigned to NPH and non-NPH groups based on LIT and ELD results. Age-matched controls were added for group comparison. 32 NPH, 46 non-NPH and 15 control subjects were enrolled in the study. There were significant differences in mean preoperative DESH scores of NPH, non-NPH and control groups (6.3 ± 2.3 ([±SD]) (range 2-10) vs 4.5 ± 2.4 (range 0-10) vs 1.0 ± 1.2 (range 0-4)). Differences in mean CA and Evans index were not significant between NPH and non-NPH groups. CSS showed 62.5% sensitivity, 60.87% specificity, 52.63% PPV and 70% NPV for differentiation of NPH and non-NPH groups. A CA of 68 degrees had 48.49% sensitivity, 76.09% specificity, 59.26% PPV 67.31% NPV and DESH score of 4 had 93.75% sensitivity, 41.30% specificity, 52.63% PPV and 90.48% NPV for differentiation between NPH and non-NPH groups. The groups of probable iNPH patients with gait impairment diagnosed by high DESH score or positive functional testing did not overlap and DESH score did not correlate with gait improvement after ELD. DESH score should not be used as a simple diagnostic or prognostic marker of iNPH and we could not confirm the benefit of measurement of callosal angle and cingulate sulcus sign.

Psychogenic non-epileptic seizures: our video-EEG experience.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to assess the number of psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) in our patients with a refractory seizure disorder, to determine the 'typical' PNES semiology using video-EEG monitoring and describe other PNES parameters. METHODS: We evaluated prospectively 596 patients with pharmacoresistant seizures. All these patients underwent continuous video-EEG monitoring. In consenting patients, we used suggestive seizure provocation. We assessed seizure semiology, interictal EEG, brain MRI, psychiatric co-morbidities, personality profiles, and seizure outcome. RESULTS: In the sample of 596 monitored patients, we detected 111 (19.3%) patients with PNES. Of the 111 patients with PNES, 86.5% had spontaneous and 76.5% had provoked seizures. The five most typical symptoms were: initially closed eyelids (67.6%), rapid tremor (47.7%), asynchronous limb movement (37.8%), preictal pseudosleep (33.3%), and side-to-side head movement (32.4%). Interictal EEG was rated as abnormal in 46.2% and with epileptiform abnormality in 9%. Brain MRI was abnormal in 32 (28.8%) patients. Personality disorders (46.8%), anxiety (39.6%), and depression (12.6%) were the most frequent additional psychiatric co-morbidities. PNES outcome after at least 2 years is reported; 22.5% patients was seizure-free; one-third had markedly reduced seizure frequency. We have not seen any negative impact of the provocative testing on the seizure outcome. DISCUSSION: Video-EEG monitoring with suggestive seizure provocation supported by clinical psychiatric and psychological evaluation significantly contributes to the correct PNES diagnosis, while interictal EEG and brain MRI are frequently abnormal. Symptoms typical for PNES, as opposed to epileptic seizures, could be distinguished.

Is pseudo-intractability in population of patients with epilepsy still alive in the 21st century? Audit of 100 seizure-free patients, referred with the diagnosis of pharmacoresistant epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: There is no universally accepted definition of pseudo-intractable epilepsy. Pseudo-intractability means that the resistance to treatment is, in fact, caused by clinical errors. The purpose of our study was to identify the reasons for intractability and subsequent effective therapeutic management approaches in a group of patients with established pseudo-intractable epilepsy. METHODS: The study was designed as a retrospective audit of 100 adult patients who, in their past medical history, were diagnosed as having intractable epilepsy but, following adjustments to their medical management, were seizure free for at least 2 years. Patients underwent standard clinical evaluation, including EEG and/or video-EEG monitoring. We re-evaluated past medical, family, seizure and pharmacological history and morphological findings. Epilepsy was re-classified according to the ILAE classification. RESULTS: We identified possible errors including incorrect diagnosis and/or inappropriate previous epilepsy management in all 100 patients. Incorrect diagnosis (seizure type and/or syndrome) was observed in 47 patients (47%). Thirty two patients (32%) with idiopathic generalized epilepsy were treated for complex focal seizures with inappropriate choice of medication. Therapeutic errors were identified in 48 patients (48%). Issues with medication compliance were found in 20 patients (20%). Potential seizure precipitating factors were detected in 23 patients (23%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study of 100 patients confirmed that the problem of pseudo-intractability still exists. Every case of pharmacoresistance in epilepsy could potentially be caused by one or more clinical errors.

Psychogenic non-epileptic seizures, prospective clinical experience: diagnosis, clinical features, risk factors, psychiatric comorbidity, treatment outcome.

In our study, we evaluated 249 patients with refractory seizures using video-EEG monitoring. In this sample, we identified 56 (22.5%) patients with psychogenic non-epileptic seizures - PNES only. Spontaneous seizures were recorded in 49 (87%) patients with PNES. Suggestive seizure induction using intravenous saline placebo was successful in 77.1% of induced PNES cases. Disease duration prior to PNES diagnosis was quite long. Prolonged past and current intake of high number of different antiepileptic drugs was also typical for these patients. We evaluated ictal PNES semiology. Whereas ictal EEG was normal in all PNES patients, interictal EEG was abnormal in 46.4%. Brain MRI was abnormal in 30.4%. Personality disorders were the most frequent psychiatric co-morbidity (in 44.6% of PNES patients), emotionally unstable (borderline) personality disorder was predominant (in 32.1% of PNES patients). Risk factors for epilepsy misdiagnosis and PNES manifestation are discussed. Therapeutic outcome after two years of combined treatment (psychopharmacotherapy and/or psychotherapy) is presented; approximately one third of patients were seizure-free following two years of treatment, one third of patients were responders (>or= 50% reduction in seizure frequency) and one third did not respond to treatment.