SynthesisEpileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape2026
Ictal semiology in lateral temporal epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe performed a systematic review of the ictal semiology of the lateral temporal lobe in focal epilepsy aiming to summarize the state-of-the-art anatomo-clinical correlations in the field and help guide interpretation of ictal semiology within the framework of pre-surgical evaluation.
methodsAfter preregistration of the study protocol (PROSPERO-ID CRD42024498889), we used the PRISMA-based approach and systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for relevant literature on the semiology of lateral temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). A random-effects meta-analysis with the inverse variance method was used to calculate pooled estimates.
resultsSix studies with 94 patients fulfilled our inclusion criteria. All studies also included patients with TLE confined to other neocortical temporal structures without performing analyses specifically on lateral temporal structures. The most common signs comprised oral automatisms, manual automatisms, and behavioral arrests; however, these likely do not manifest at seizure onset but during propagation. Overall, GRADE evaluation indicated very low evidence for any signs or symptoms being associated with anatomic localization. We performed a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the presence or absence of relevant ictal signs and symptoms for differentiating seizures in lateral versus mesial TLE. The presence of auditory auras was highly specific for lateral TLE (.98 [95% CI .88-1.00]) with an overall sensitivity of .06 [95% CI .02-.22]. Lack of epigastric or olfactory/gustatory aura was associated with a high sensitivity for differentiating lateral from mesial TLE (.93 [95% CI .80-.98] and .96 [95% CI .84-.99], respectively); specificity was .38 [95% CI .26-.51] for lack of epigastric aura and .13 [95% CI .06-.25] for lack of olfactory/gustatory aura. SIGNIFICANCE: The six studies included in this systematic review defined the boundaries of the lateral temporal lobe quite heterogeneously and only about two-thirds of patients unambiguously had lateral temporal lobe epilepsy likely explaining the wide spectrum of ictal semiologies. Furthermore, there is often no differentiation into seizure onset versus propagation. Auditory auras represent the only specific semiology for lateral TLE, though this symptom occurs in less than every 10th patient. Comparing lateral versus mesial temporal lobe epilepsy, the presence of epigastric auras and even more so of olfactory/gustatory auras indicates mesial rather than lateral seizure onset.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.