Premium
Early seizures after temporal lobectomy predict subsequent seizure recurrence
Author(s) -
McIntosh Anne M.,
Kalnins Renate M.,
Mitchell L. Anne,
Berkovic Samuel F.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
annals of neurology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 4.764
H-Index - 296
eISSN - 1531-8249
pISSN - 0364-5134
DOI - 10.1002/ana.20372
Subject(s) - epilepsy , confidence interval , medicine , relative risk , anesthesia , risk factor , convulsion , poisson regression , electroencephalography , pediatrics , psychiatry , population , environmental health
Abstract Patients are understandably anxious if seizures occur immediately after temporal lobectomy. Such “neighborhood” seizures are commonly regarded as irrelevant to seizure outcome and discounted in outcome measurement. We conducted an in‐depth examination of early postoperative seizures (<28 days) and outcome. The risk of recurrence at one postoperative year was calculated using Poisson regression, and statistical adjustments were made for preoperative pathology. Of 321 patients, 69 (22%) experienced early postoperative seizures. These early seizures were associated with subsequent seizure recurrence (rate ratio [RR] 5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1–8.4). Among patients with early seizures, the only significant factor was the presence of seizure precipitants, which was associated with a lower recurrence risk. However, when compared with patients with no early seizures, those with precipitants to early seizures had a higher risk of recurrence (RR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.8–5.2). The risk was higher again for patients without precipitants to early seizures (RR, 7.6; 95% CI, 5.0–11.5). Early seizures and other seizure recurrences in the first postoperative year did not differ in their effect on subsequent outcome (X 2 [3] = 3.4, p = 0.33). We conclude that early postoperative seizures are associated with subsequent seizure recurrence. These findings have implications for patient counseling and the measurement of outcome. Ann Neurol 2005;57:283–288