4.5 Article

The medical and surgical treatment of tumoral seizures: Current and future perspectives

期刊

EPILEPSIA
卷 54, 期 -, 页码 84-90

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/epi.12450

关键词

Brain tumor; Tumor-related epilepsy; Surgical treatment; Medical treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epilepsy surgery represents the main treatment option for epileptogenic brain tumors. Scalp video-electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may suffice for defining lesional area and seizure-onset zone in discrete, surgically resectable lesions. The choice of timing for surgery requires a multidisciplinary evaluation, especially in children, when a wait and see approach is chosen. Discordant electroclinical and neuroimaging data and an ill-defined epileptogenic lesion require invasive investigations. A multimodal integrated approach may maximize the extent of resection while preserving cerebral function in the eloquent cortex. Radical removal of the tumor is the most important predictor of seizure freedom. Additional predictors include histopathology, age at surgery, duration of epilepsy, and seizure type. Patients with brain tumors are highly vulnerable in relation to the frequent drug-resistance of seizures, the potential interactions between antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and chemotherapeutic agents (CMTs), and the risk of AED-related cognitive adverse events (24% higher than in the rest of the epilepsy population), in addition to brain damage resulting from tumor itself, surgery, and radiotherapy. No robust, randomized, controlled evidence supports the choice of AEDs for the treatment of seizures in patients with brain tumors. Newer AEDs have limited or no enzyme-inducing profile, prevalent renal excretion, lower plasma protein binding and, consequently, fewer interactions with CMTs. Enzyme-inducing AEDs can lower serum levels of concomitantly administered CMTs. Class I evidence suggests that in patients with brain tumors who do not have a history of seizures, prophylactic use of AEDs is neutral or ineffective.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据