We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Focal lesionectomy as surgical treatment of epilepsy in patients with Sturge-Weber syndrome: a case-based systematic review and meta-analysis.
Neurosurgical Focus 2022 May
OBJECTIVE: Sturge-Weber syndrome (SWS) is a rare neurocutaneous disorder presenting mostly with a facial port-wine stain and leptomeningeal angiomatosis. More than 85% of the patients are affected by epilepsy by the age of 2 years. Seizure and symptom control is the focus of SWS treatment, since no causal therapy exists yet. For pharmacologically intractable epilepsy, surgery is a treatment option. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide an overview of the literature regarding lesionectomy in SWS with a focus on seizure outcome, complications, and motor and cognitive development.
METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched using a systematic search strategy to identify studies on SWS from their inception until 2021. Two independent researchers assessed the studies for inclusion and quality. Outcome measures were seizure outcome, postoperative complications, and motor and cognitive development. Thereafter, a systematic review was conducted, and a meta-analysis was performed for all included cohort studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Forest plots have been generated for all outcomes; risk ratio was used for pooled outcomes. A p value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
RESULTS: After removal of duplicates, the authors screened 439 articles, of which 9 articles with 150 patients were included. Our case and 5 case reports and 4 retrospective cohort studies were included for systematic review. The latter 4 studies qualified for the meta-analysis. In these 4 articles, 144 patients received surgical treatment: 81 (56%) underwent focal lesionectomy and 63 (44%) hemispherectomy. Pooled outcome analysis for postoperative favorable seizure outcome showed a nonsignificant difference between lesionectomy and hemispherectomy (69.2% vs 87.3%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.08; t = -2.56, p = 0.08). Lesionectomy showed a significantly lower rate for developmental delay and postoperative hemiparesis in comparison with hemispherectomy (29.8% vs 76.3%; RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28-0.59; z = -4.77, p < 0.0001 and 18.1% vs 100%; RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.21; z = -6.58, p < 0.0001, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited literature available, lesionectomy leads to a nonsignificant lower seizure control rate, while postoperative developmental or motor deficits are significantly lower compared with hemispherectomy. Therefore, focal lesionectomy remains a valid alternative to hemispherectomy in SWS with a clearly localized epileptogenic area; however, individual case-based decisions in a specialized multidisciplinary team are of paramount importance.
METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched using a systematic search strategy to identify studies on SWS from their inception until 2021. Two independent researchers assessed the studies for inclusion and quality. Outcome measures were seizure outcome, postoperative complications, and motor and cognitive development. Thereafter, a systematic review was conducted, and a meta-analysis was performed for all included cohort studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Forest plots have been generated for all outcomes; risk ratio was used for pooled outcomes. A p value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
RESULTS: After removal of duplicates, the authors screened 439 articles, of which 9 articles with 150 patients were included. Our case and 5 case reports and 4 retrospective cohort studies were included for systematic review. The latter 4 studies qualified for the meta-analysis. In these 4 articles, 144 patients received surgical treatment: 81 (56%) underwent focal lesionectomy and 63 (44%) hemispherectomy. Pooled outcome analysis for postoperative favorable seizure outcome showed a nonsignificant difference between lesionectomy and hemispherectomy (69.2% vs 87.3%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.08; t = -2.56, p = 0.08). Lesionectomy showed a significantly lower rate for developmental delay and postoperative hemiparesis in comparison with hemispherectomy (29.8% vs 76.3%; RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28-0.59; z = -4.77, p < 0.0001 and 18.1% vs 100%; RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.21; z = -6.58, p < 0.0001, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited literature available, lesionectomy leads to a nonsignificant lower seizure control rate, while postoperative developmental or motor deficits are significantly lower compared with hemispherectomy. Therefore, focal lesionectomy remains a valid alternative to hemispherectomy in SWS with a clearly localized epileptogenic area; however, individual case-based decisions in a specialized multidisciplinary team are of paramount importance.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app