4.5 Article

Epilepsy surgery outcomes in temporal lobe epilepsy with a normal MRI

Journal

EPILEPSIA
Volume 50, Issue 9, Pages 2053-2060

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02079.x

Keywords

Partial seizures; Epilepsy surgery; Temporal lobe; Nonlesional-MRI

Funding

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS063039-01A1, R01 NS063039, K23 NS047495-05, K23 NS047495] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>Purpose: To determine the long-term efficacy of anterior temporal lobectomy for medically refractory temporal lobe epilepsy in patients with nonlesional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods: We identified a retrospective cohort of 44 patients with a nonlesional modern seizure protocol MRI who underwent anterior temporal lobectomy for treatment of medically refractory partial epilepsy. Postoperative seizure freedom was determined by Kaplan-Meyer survival analysis. Noninvasive preoperative diagnostic factors potentially associated with excellent surgical outcome were examined by univariate analysis in the 40 patients with follow-up of > 1 year. Results: Engel class I outcomes (free of disabling seizures) were observed in 60% (24 of 40) patients. Preoperative factors associated with Engel class I outcome were: (1) absence of contralateral or extratemporal interictal epileptiform discharges, (2) subtraction ictal single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) Coregistered to MRI (SISCOM) abnormality localized to the resection site, and (3) subtle nonspecific MRI findings in the mesial temporal lobe concordant to the resection. Discussion: In carefully selected patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and a nonlesional MRI, anterior temporal lobectomy can often render patients free of disabling seizures. This favorable rate of surgical success is likely due to the detection of concordant abnormalities that indicate unilateral temporal lobe epilepsy in patients with nonlesional MRI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available