Cited by 56Epilepsy research and treatmentNeurological disorders and treatmentsDiet and metabolism studies

Update on the surgical treatment of epilepsy

Jette, Nathalie, Wiebe, Samuel·2013·Current Opinion in Neurology

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Using the most recent evidence, we provide an update about epilepsy surgery, focusing on the presurgical evaluation and surgical planning, epilepsy surgery outcomes, and utilization. RECENT FINDINGS: Great strides are being achieved in the presurgical evaluation and planning for epilepsy surgery, including fundamental advances in imaging and neurophysiology. A recent randomized controlled trial demonstrates that early surgery for patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is superior to medical therapy. The enduring benefits of surgery continue to be demonstrated, particularly after TLE surgery. However, studies examining the long-term outcomes after extratemporal lobe epilepsy surgery are scarce. Surgery is generally associated with an improvement in depression, but mostly in those with good surgical outcome. Complications from invasive monitoring or after epilepsy surgery are generally temporary, or limited in their symptomatology. One area in need of prospective studies is the topic of antiepileptic drug withdrawal after epilepsy surgery (Who? When? How?). Despite its proven effectiveness, epilepsy surgery continues to be underutilized, but new tools for health professionals are emerging to guide appropriate surgical referrals. SUMMARY: Important contributions to the field of epilepsy surgery are discussed, in particular emerging imaging (fMRI) and neurophysiological (high-frequency oscillations) techniques. Epilepsy surgery is effective, well tolerated but still underutilized.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/wco.0b013e32835ef345

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jette, N., & Wiebe, S.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Wiebe, Samuel
Venue
Current Opinion in Neurology
Published
2013-04
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
201-207
ISSN
1350-7540 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2322065534
Cited by
56
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Diet and metabolism studies
Keywords
epilepsy surgery, preoperative assessment, surgical planning, mesial temporal lobe epilepsy, extratemporal epilepsy, postoperative outcomes, depression, postoperative complications, invasive monitoring, antiepileptic drug withdrawal, functional MRI, high-frequency oscillations, surgical referral
MeSH terms
Epilepsy, Humans, Neurosurgery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review