Journals / The Journal of Pediatric Research / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

Clinical and Electrophysiological Prognostic Factors of Childhood Absence Epilepsy

Pages
320–325
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Early initiation of treatment and OIRDA were good prognostic factors, while high amplitude and numerous discharges were among the poor prognostic factors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Childhood absence epilepsy is common idiopathic epilepsy in childhood.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: The electroencephalography (EEG) and clinical findings of patients diagnosed with childhood absence epilepsy who were monitored for at least 12 months in the pediatric neurology clinics of two university hospitals between 2016 and 2020 were reviewed retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Early initiation of treatment and OIRDA were good prognostic factors, while high amplitude and numerous discharges were among the poor prognostic factors.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Aim: Childhood absence epilepsy is common idiopathic epilepsy in childhood. This epilepsy, which has been shown to impair cognition, needs to be treated promptly and correctly. Therefore, determining its prognostic factors before treatment can provide prediction on the duration of treatment, drug selection, and drug dosage. Materials and Methods: The electroencephalography (EEG) and clinical findings of patients diagnosed with childhood absence epilepsy who were monitored for at least 12 months in the pediatric neurology clinics of two university hospitals between 2016 and 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups as responsive and unresponsive, according to seizures, EEG findings, and recurrent seizures after treatment. The epidemiological and clinical features of the two groups were compared. Results: Sixty-three patients who were diagnosed with childhood absence epilepsy according to the Panayiotopoulos criteria participated in this study. Thirty-nine (62%) of the patients were responsive to treatment (group 1), the remaining 24 patients (38%) (group 2) were unresponsive to treatment. Fifteen patients were valproate resistant, and nine patients relapsed after drug treatment withdrawal in group 2. The mean age of the patients was 7.87±1.68. The mean follow-up period was 29.1±13.6 (13-72 months) months. The mean age was lower in the responsive group of patients. The time between the onset of seizures and treatment was significantly longer in group 2. The number of patients with occipital intermittent rhythmic delta activity (OIRDA) in the responsive group was higher. A significant difference was found in the number of spike-slow wave complex and the amplitude of discharges between the two groups. Conclusion: In this study, it was seen that young age was an advantage for treatment response. Early initiation of treatment and OIRDA were good prognostic factors, while high amplitude and numerous discharges were among the poor prognostic factors.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEKİN, H. G., KARAOGLU, P., Edem, P. (2021). Clinical and Electrophysiological Prognostic Factors of Childhood Absence Epilepsy. The Journal of Pediatric Research, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 320–325. https://ajindex.com/articles/362702

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Loiseau P, Duché B, Pédespan JM. Absence epilepsies. Epilepsia 1995; 36:1182-6
  2. Albuja AC, Murphy PB. Absence Seizure. 2020 Nov 21. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2021
  3. Fisher RS. The new classification of seizures by the International League Against Epilepsy 2017. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2017; 17:48
  4. Wirrell E, Camfield C, Camfield P, Dooley J. Prognostic significance of failure of the initial antiepileptic drug in children with absence epilepsy. Epilepsia 2001; 42:760-3
  5. Grosso S, Galimberti D, Vezzosi P, et al. Childhood absence epilepsy: evolution and prognostic factors. Epilepsia 2005; 46:1796-1801
  6. Covanis A, Skiadas K, Loli N, Lada C, Theodorou V. Absence epilepsy: early prognostic signs. Seizure 1992; 1:281-9
  7. Sreedharan M, Devadathan K, Pathan HK, Chalipat S, Mohammed KPA. Amantadine for the treatment of refractory absence seizures in children. J Pediatr Neurosci 2018; 13:131-6
  8. Ollivier ML, Dubois MF, Krajinovic M, Cossette P, Carmant L. Risk factors for valproic acid resistance in childhood absence epilepsy. Seizure 2009; 18:690-4
  9. Wirrell EC, Camfield CS, Camfield PR, Dooley JM, Gordon KE, Smith B. Long-term psychosocial outcome in typical absence epilepsy. Sometimes a wolf in sheeps’ clothing. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1997; 151:152-8
  10. Shinnar S, Berg AT, Moshé SL, et al. Discontinuing antiepileptic drugs in children with epilepsy: a prospective study. Ann Neurol 1994; 35:534-45
  11. Kessler SK, McGinnis E. A practical guide to treatment of childhood absence epilepsy. Paediatr Drugs 2019; 21:15-24
  12. Verrotti A, D’Egidio C, Agostinelli S, et al. Antiepileptic drug withdrawal in childhood epilepsy: what are the risk factors associated with seizure relapse? Eur J Paediatr Neurol EJPN Off J Eur Paediatr Neurol Soc 2012; 16:599-604
  13. Incecik F, Altunbasak S, Herguner OM. First-drug treatment failures in children with typical absence epilepsy. Brain Dev 2015; 37:311-4
  14. Kim HR, Kim GH, Eun SH, Eun BL, Byeon JH. Therapeutic outcomes and prognostic factors in childhood absence epilepsy. J Clin Neurol 2016; 12:160-5
  15. Gurbani S, Chayasirisobhon S, Gurbani A, McCall N. Does early recognition of treatment failure and changing anti-epilepsy medication regimen ımprove short-term seizure remission rates ın childhood absence epilepsy? Acta Neurol Taiwan 2020; 29:46-53
  16. Glauser TA, Cnaan A, Shinnar S, et al. Ethosuximide, valproic acid, and lamotrigine in childhood absence