Detailed Information on Publication Record
2015
Long-term outcomes in patients after epilepsy surgery failure
RYZÍ, Michal, Milan BRÁZDIL, Zdeněk NOVÁK, Jan HEMZA, Jan CHRASTINA et. al.Basic information
Original name
Long-term outcomes in patients after epilepsy surgery failure
Authors
RYZÍ, Michal (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution), Milan BRÁZDIL (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Zdeněk NOVÁK (203 Czech Republic), Jan HEMZA (203 Czech Republic), Jan CHRASTINA (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Hana OŠLEJŠKOVÁ (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Ivan REKTOR (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution) and Robert KUBA (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution)
Edition
Epilepsy Research, Amsterdam, Elsevier Science, 2015, 0920-1211
Other information
Language
English
Type of outcome
Článek v odborném periodiku
Field of Study
30000 3. Medical and Health Sciences
Country of publisher
Netherlands
Confidentiality degree
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impact factor
Impact factor: 2.237
RIV identification code
RIV/00216224:14110/15:00083356
Organization unit
Faculty of Medicine
UT WoS
000349592800010
Keywords in English
Epilepsy surgery; Failure; Reoperation; Vagus nerve stimulation; Treatment options
Tags
International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 16/7/2015 09:36, Ing. Mgr. Věra Pospíšilíková
Abstract
V originále
Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to analyze the long-term outcomes of patients who were classified as Engel IV one year after resective epilepsy surgery. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the effectiveness of different treatment options and to examine the reasons that the patients did not undergo resective reoperation. Methods: Our study was designed as a retrospective open-label investigation of the long-term outcomes of 34 patients (12% of all surgically treated patients) who were classified as Engel IV one year after epilepsy surgery. Results: At the last follow-up visit (average of 7.6 +/- 4.2 years after surgery), 12 of the 34 examined patients (35.3%) were still classified as Engel IV; 22 of the 34 patients (64.7%) were improved (Engel I III). Of the 34 patients, 8 (23.5%) achieved an excellent outcome, classified as Engel I, 3 patients (8.8%) were classified as Engel II, and 11 patients (32.4%) as Engel III. The seizure outcome in the patients classified as Engel I was achieved by resective reoperation in 4; by a change in antiepileptic medication in 3 patients; and by vagus nerve stimulation (VHS) in 1 patient. The seizure outcome of Engel II was achieved by a change in antiepileptic medication in all 3 patients. Of the 34 patients, a total of 6 (17.6%) underwent resective reoperation only. The major reasons for this were the absence of a plausible hypothesis for invasive re-evaluation, the risk of postoperative deficit, and multifocal epilepsy in the rest of patients. Conclusion: Although the reoperation rate was relatively low in our series, we can achieve better or even excellent seizure outcomes using other procedures in patients for whom resective surgery initially failed.
Links
| ED1.1.00/02.0068, research and development project |
|