Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37198666›Full record

ArticleNeurological research and practice2023

Video-EEG-monitoring to guide antiseizure medication withdrawal.

Laurien K L Dhaenens-Meyer, Elisabeth Schriewer, Yvonne G Weber, Stefan Wolking

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurological research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laurien K L Dhaenens-MeyerDepartment of Epileptology and Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany. laurien_dhaenens@hotmail.com.
Elisabeth SchriewerDepartment of Epileptology and Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Yvonne G WeberDepartment of Epileptology and Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Stefan WolkingDepartment of Epileptology and Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
RWTH Aachen University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiscontinuing anti-seizure medication (ASM) should be considered in persons with epilepsy with long-term seizure freedom. Clinicians should also pursue ASM withdrawal in persons with one-time seizures without increased recurrence risk and those with suspected non-epileptic events. However, ASM withdrawal is associated with the risk of recurring seizures. Monitored ASM withdrawal in an epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) could help better evaluate the risk of seizure recurrence. Here, we investigate the practice of EMU-guided ASM withdrawal, assess its indications, and aim to determine positive and negative predictors for successful withdrawal.

methodsWe screened the medical records of all patients admitted to our EMU between November 1, 2019, and October 31, 2021, and included patients of at least 18 years admitted with the aim of permanent ASM withdrawal. We defined four groups of withdrawal indications: (1) long-term seizure freedom; (2) suspected non-epileptic events; (3) history of epileptic seizures but not fulfilling diagnostic criteria of epilepsy; and (4) seizure-freedom after epilepsy surgery. Successful withdrawal was defined according to the following criteria: no recoding of (sub)clinical seizure activity during VEM (groups 1, 2, and 3), patients did not meet the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) definition of epilepsy (groups 2 and 3) [14], and patients were discharged without ongoing ASM treatment (all groups). We also evaluated the prediction model by Lamberink et al. (LPM) for the risk of seizure recurrence in groups 1 and 3.

results55/651 (8.6%) patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Withdrawal indications were distributed as follows; group 1: 2/55 (3.6%); group 2: 44/55 (80%); group 3: 9/55 (16,4%); group 4: 0/55. Overall, ASM withdrawal was successful in 90.9%. The sensitivity of the LPM for a 2-year 50% relapse risk threshold was 75%, the specificity 33.3%; for a 5-year relapse risk respectively 12.5% and 33.3%, suggesting that the model is not suitable for risk assessment in patients with one-time seizures or acute-symptomatic seizures, who constituted most of the evaluated patients.

conclusionsOur study suggests that EMU-guided ASM withdrawal could be a helpful tool to support clinical decision-making and improve patient safety. Prospective, randomized trials should further evaluate this method in the future.

Indexed as

Anti-seizure medicationEpilepsy monitoring unitSeizure recurrence riskVideo-EEG-monitoringWithdrawal

Identifiers

PMID37198666
PMCPMC10193797
OpenAlexW4376959460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.