PURPOSE: The terms "electrical status epilepticus during sleep (ESES)" and "continuous spikes and waves during sleep (CSWS)" have been used interchangeably when referring to related but different concepts. In addition, the quantification of epileptiform activity has not been standardized, and different approaches to quantification have been used. The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent to which pediatric neurologists and epileptologists use a homogeneous terminology and conceptualization in CSWS and ESES and to characterize the current understanding of these conditions. METHODS: A survey addressing the use of terminology in "ESES" and "CSWS" and the understanding of related concepts was distributed online to all members of the Child Neurology Society and the American Epilepsy Society mailing lists. Surveys were self-administered and collected using an online survey website (http://www.surveymonkey.com). KEY FINDINGS: Two hundred nineteen surveys were completed, 137 from the Child Neurology Society mailing list and 82 from the American Epilepsy Society mailing list. ESES and CSWS were considered synonymous by 117 respondents, not synonymous by 61, 21 respondents did not know, and 20 did not respond. Most respondents (63.1%) considered CSWS as a devastating epileptic encephalopathy with severe sequelae even if treated correctly, but 25.1% of respondents indicated that it does not leave sequelae if epilepsy was treated early and another 11.8% noted that cognitive difficulties resolved with age. Cognitive and/or language regression were considered mandatory for the diagnosis of CSWS by only 27% of the respondents. The diagnosis of CSWS was based on electroencephalography (EEG) assessment alone by 31% of respondents. Respondents used different methods for calculation of the epileptiform activity, different EEG samples for calculation, and considered differently the lateralized epileptiform activity. The cut-off values for percentage of the sleep record occupied by spike-waves were variable depending on the respondent. There was no agreement on whether these cutoff values were mandatory for the diagnosis of ESES and CSWS. SIGNIFICANCE: Our data show that the professionals caring for children with ESES and CSWS in North America use the terms, concepts, and defining features heterogeneously. The lack of a common language may complicate communication among clinicians and jeopardize research in this field. We anticipate that our data will fuel the development of much needed common terminology and conceptualization of ESES and CSWS. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PURPOSE: The terms "electrical status epilepticus during sleep (ESES)" and "continuous spikes and waves during sleep (CSWS)" have been used interchangeably when referring to related but different concepts. In addition, the quantification of epileptiform activity has not been standardized, and different approaches to quantification have been used. The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent to which pediatric neurologists and epileptologists use a homogeneous terminology and conceptualization in CSWS and ESES and to characterize the current understanding of these conditions. METHODS: A survey addressing the use of terminology in "ESES" and "CSWS" and the understanding of related concepts was distributed online to all members of the Child Neurology Society and the American Epilepsy Society mailing lists. Surveys were self-administered and collected using an online survey website (http://www.surveymonkey.com). KEY FINDINGS: Two hundred nineteen surveys were completed, 137 from the Child Neurology Society mailing list and 82 from the American Epilepsy Society mailing list. ESES and CSWS were considered synonymous by 117 respondents, not synonymous by 61, 21 respondents did not know, and 20 did not respond. Most respondents (63.1%) considered CSWS as a devastating epilepticencephalopathy with severe sequelae even if treated correctly, but 25.1% of respondents indicated that it does not leave sequelae if epilepsy was treated early and another 11.8% noted that cognitive difficulties resolved with age. Cognitive and/or language regression were considered mandatory for the diagnosis of CSWS by only 27% of the respondents. The diagnosis of CSWS was based on electroencephalography (EEG) assessment alone by 31% of respondents. Respondents used different methods for calculation of the epileptiform activity, different EEG samples for calculation, and considered differently the lateralized epileptiform activity. The cut-off values for percentage of the sleep record occupied by spike-waves were variable depending on the respondent. There was no agreement on whether these cutoff values were mandatory for the diagnosis of ESES and CSWS. SIGNIFICANCE: Our data show that the professionals caring for children with ESES and CSWS in North America use the terms, concepts, and defining features heterogeneously. The lack of a common language may complicate communication among clinicians and jeopardize research in this field. We anticipate that our data will fuel the development of much needed common terminology and conceptualization of ESES and CSWS. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Authors: C A Tassinari; G Rubboli; L Volpi; S Meletti; G d'Orsi; M Franca; A R Sabetta; P Riguzzi; E Gardella; A Zaniboni; R Michelucci Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: I Sánchez Fernández; M Takeoka; E Tas; J M Peters; S P Prabhu; K M Stannard; M Gregas; Y Eksioglu; A Rotenberg; J J Riviello; S V Kothare; T Loddenkemper Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-04-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jeffrey R Tenney; Tracy Glauser; Mekibib Altaye; Jerzy P Szaflarski; Caroline Spencer; Diego Morita; Jennifer Vannest Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2016-03-25 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Johannes R Lemke; Dennis Lal; Eva M Reinthaler; Isabelle Steiner; Michael Nothnagel; Michael Alber; Kirsten Geider; Bodo Laube; Michael Schwake; Katrin Finsterwalder; Andre Franke; Markus Schilhabel; Johanna A Jähn; Hiltrud Muhle; Rainer Boor; Wim Van Paesschen; Roberto Caraballo; Natalio Fejerman; Sarah Weckhuysen; Peter De Jonghe; Jan Larsen; Rikke S Møller; Helle Hjalgrim; Laura Addis; Shan Tang; Elaine Hughes; Deb K Pal; Kadi Veri; Ulvi Vaher; Tiina Talvik; Petia Dimova; Rosa Guerrero López; José M Serratosa; Tarja Linnankivi; Anna-Elina Lehesjoki; Susanne Ruf; Markus Wolff; Sarah Buerki; Gabriele Wohlrab; Judith Kroell; Alexandre N Datta; Barbara Fiedler; Gerhard Kurlemann; Gerhard Kluger; Andreas Hahn; D Edda Haberlandt; Christina Kutzer; Jürgen Sperner; Felicitas Becker; Yvonne G Weber; Martha Feucht; Hannelore Steinböck; Birgit Neophythou; Gabriel M Ronen; Ursula Gruber-Sedlmayr; Julia Geldner; Robert J Harvey; Per Hoffmann; Stefan Herms; Janine Altmüller; Mohammad R Toliat; Holger Thiele; Peter Nürnberg; Christian Wilhelm; Ulrich Stephani; Ingo Helbig; Holger Lerche; Fritz Zimprich; Bernd A Neubauer; Saskia Biskup; Sarah von Spiczak Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-08-11 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Fiona M Baumer; Nancy A McNamara; Anthony L Fine; Elia Pestana-Knight; Renée A Shellhaas; Zihuai He; Daniel H Arndt; William D Gaillard; Sarah A Kelley; Margot Nagan; Adam P Ostendorf; Nilika S Singhal; Laura Speltz; Kevin E Chapman Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Iván Sánchez Fernández; Kevin E Chapman; Jurriaan M Peters; Chellamani Harini; Alexander Rotenberg; Tobias Loddenkemper Journal: Epilepsy Res Treat Date: 2013-08-06
Authors: Bart van den Munckhof; Alexis Arzimanoglou; Emilio Perucca; Heleen C van Teeseling; Frans S S Leijten; Kees P J Braun; Floor E Jansen Journal: Trials Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 2.279