Dataset Information

Practice guideline summary: Use of fMRI in the presurgical evaluation of patients with epilepsy: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of functional MRI (fMRI) in determining lateralization and predicting postsurgical language and memory outcomes.

Methods

An 11-member panel evaluated and rated available evidence according to the 2004 American Academy of Neurology process. At least 2 panelists reviewed the full text of 172 articles and selected 37 for data extraction. Case reports, reports with <15 cases, meta-analyses, and editorials were excluded.

Results and recommendations

The use of fMRI may be considered an option for lateralizing language functions in place of intracarotid amobarbital procedure (IAP) in patients with medial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE; Level C), temporal epilepsy in general (Level C), or extratemporal epilepsy (Level C). For patients with temporal neocortical epilepsy or temporal tumors, the evidence is insufficient (Level U). fMRI may be considered to predict postsurgical language deficits after anterior temporal lobe resection (Level C). The use of fMRI may be considered for lateralizing memory functions in place of IAP in patients with MTLE (Level C) but is of unclear utility in other epilepsy types (Level U). fMRI of verbal memory or language encoding should be considered for predicting verbal memory outcome (Level B). fMRI using nonverbal memory encoding may be considered for predicting visuospatial memory outcomes (Level C). Presurgical fMRI could be an adequate alternative to IAP memory testing for predicting verbal memory outcome (Level C). Clinicians should carefully advise patients of the risks and benefits of fMRI vs IAP during discussions concerning choice of specific modality in each case.

SUBMITTER: Szaflarski JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5272968 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo make evidence-based recommendations regarding restless legs syndrome (RLS) management in adults.MethodsArticles were classified per the 2004 American Academy of Neurology evidence rating scheme. Recommendations were tied to evidence strength.Results and recommendationsIn moderate to severe primary RLS, clinicians should consider prescribing medication to reduce RLS symptoms. Strong evidence supports pramipexole, rotigotine, cabergoline, and gabapentin enacarbil use (Level A); moderate evidence supports ropinirole, pregabalin, and IV ferric carboxymaltose use (Level B). Clinicians may consider prescribing levodopa (Level C). Few head-to-head comparisons exist to suggest agents preferentially. Cabergoline is rarely used (cardiac valvulopathy risks). Augmentation risks with dopaminergic agents should be considered. When treating periodic limb movements of sleep, clinicians should consider prescribing ropinirole (Level A) or pramipexole, rotigotine, cabergoline, or pregabalin (Level B). For subjective sleep measures, clinicians should consider prescribing cabergoline or gabapentin enacarbil (Level A), or ropinirole, pramipexole, rotigotine, or pregabalin (Level B). For patients failing other treatments for RLS symptoms, clinicians may consider prescribing prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone where available (Level C). In patients with RLS with ferritin ≤75 μg/L, clinicians should consider prescribing ferrous sulfate with vitamin C (Level B). When nonpharmacologic approaches are desired, clinicians should consider prescribing pneumatic compression (Level B) and may consider prescribing near-infrared spectroscopy or transcranial magnetic stimulation (Level C). Clinicians may consider prescribing vibrating pads to improve subjective sleep (Level C). In patients on hemodialysis with secondary RLS, clinicians should consider prescribing vitamin C and E supplementation (Level B) and may consider prescribing ropinirole, levodopa, or exercise (Level C).

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop evidence-based recommendations for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in multiple sclerosis (MS).MethodsWe searched the literature (1970-March 2011; March 2011-September 2013 MEDLINE search), classified articles, and linked recommendations to evidence.Results and recommendationsClinicians might offer oral cannabis extract for spasticity symptoms and pain (excluding central neuropathic pain) (Level A). Clinicians might offer tetrahydrocannabinol for spasticity symptoms and pain (excluding central neuropathic pain) (Level B). Clinicians should counsel patients that these agents are probably ineffective for objective spasticity (short-term)/tremor (Level B) and possibly effective for spasticity and pain (long-term) (Level C). Clinicians might offer Sativex oromucosal cannabinoid spray (nabiximols) for spasticity symptoms, pain, and urinary frequency (Level B). Clinicians should counsel patients that these agents are probably ineffective for objective spasticity/urinary incontinence (Level B). Clinicians might choose not to offer these agents for tremor (Level C). Clinicians might counsel patients that magnetic therapy is probably effective for fatigue and probably ineffective for depression (Level B); fish oil is probably ineffective for relapses, disability, fatigue, MRI lesions, and quality of life (QOL) (Level B); ginkgo biloba is ineffective for cognition (Level A) and possibly effective for fatigue (Level C); reflexology is possibly effective for paresthesia (Level C); Cari Loder regimen is possibly ineffective for disability, symptoms, depression, and fatigue (Level C); and bee sting therapy is possibly ineffective for relapses, disability, fatigue, lesion burden/volume, and health-related QOL (Level C). Cannabinoids may cause adverse effects. Clinicians should exercise caution regarding standardized vs nonstandardized cannabis extracts and overall CAM quality control/nonregulation. Safety/efficacy of other CAM/CAM interaction with MS disease-modifying therapies is unknown.

Project description:ObjectiveTo update the 1997 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) practice parameter regarding sports concussion, focusing on 4 questions: 1) What factors increase/decrease concussion risk? 2) What diagnostic tools identify those with concussion and those at increased risk for severe/prolonged early impairments, neurologic catastrophe, or chronic neurobehavioral impairment? 3) What clinical factors identify those at increased risk for severe/prolonged early postconcussion impairments, neurologic catastrophe, recurrent concussions, or chronic neurobehavioral impairment? 4) What interventions enhance recovery, reduce recurrent concussion risk, or diminish long-term sequelae? The complete guideline on which this summary is based is available as an online data supplement to this article.MethodsWe systematically reviewed the literature from 1955 to June 2012 for pertinent evidence. We assessed evidence for quality and synthesized into conclusions using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. We used a modified Delphi process to develop recommendations.ResultsSpecific risk factors can increase or decrease concussion risk. Diagnostic tools to help identify individuals with concussion include graded symptom checklists, the Standardized Assessment of Concussion, neuropsychological assessments, and the Balance Error Scoring System. Ongoing clinical symptoms, concussion history, and younger age identify those at risk for postconcussion impairments. Risk factors for recurrent concussion include history of multiple concussions, particularly within 10 days after initial concussion. Risk factors for chronic neurobehavioral impairment include concussion exposure and APOE ε4 genotype. Data are insufficient to show that any intervention enhances recovery or diminishes long-term sequelae postconcussion. Practice recommendations are presented for preparticipation counseling, management of suspected concussion, and management of diagnosed concussion.