| Literature DB >> 32155575 |
Felix Rosenow1, Naoki Akamatsu2, Thomas Bast3, Sebastian Bauer4, Christoph Baumgartner5, Selim Benbadis6, Adriana Bermeo-Ovalle7, Stefan Beyenburg8, Andrew Bleasel9, Alireza Bozorgi10, Milan Brázdil11, Mar Carreño12, Norman Delanty13, Michael Devereaux14, John Duncan15, Guadalupe Fernandez-Baca Vaca14, Stefano Francione16, Naiara García Losarcos14, Lauren Ghanma14, Antonio Gil-Nagel17, Hajo Hamer18, Hans Holthausen19, Shirin Jamal Omidi20, Philippe Kahane21, Giri Kalamangalam22, Andrés Kanner23, Susanne Knake24, Stjepana Kovac25, Karsten Krakow26, Günter Krämer27, Gerhard Kurlemann28, Nuria Lacuey29, Patrick Landazuri30, Shi Hui Lim31, Luisa V Londoño32, Giorgio LoRusso16, Hans Luders14, Jayanti Mani33, Riki Matsumoto34, Jonathan Miller35, Soheyl Noachtar36, Rebecca O'Dwyer37, André Palmini38, Jun Park39, Philipp S Reif4, Jan Remi36, Americo C Sakamoto40, Bettina Schmitz41, Susanne Schubert-Bast42, Stephan Schuele43, Asim Shahid39, Bernhard Steinhoff3, Adam Strzelczyk4, C Akos Szabo44, Nitin Tandon45, Kiyohito Terada46, Manuel Toledo47, Walter van Emde Boas48, Matthew Walker15, Peter Widdess-Walsh13.
Abstract
Over the last few decades the ILAE classifications for seizures and epilepsies (ILAE-EC) have been updated repeatedly to reflect the substantial progress that has been made in diagnosis and understanding of the etiology of epilepsies and seizures and to correct some of the shortcomings of the terminology used by the original taxonomy from the 1980s. However, these proposals have not been universally accepted or used in routine clinical practice. During the same period, a separate classification known as the "Four-dimensional epilepsy classification" (4D-EC) was developed which includes a seizure classification based exclusively on ictal symptomatology, which has been tested and adapted over the years. The extensive arguments for and against these two classification systems made in the past have mainly focused on the shortcomings of each system, presuming that they are incompatible. As a further more detailed discussion of the differences seemed relatively unproductive, we here review and assess the concordance between these two approaches that has evolved over time, to consider whether a classification incorporating the best aspects of the two approaches is feasible. To facilitate further discussion in this direction we outline a concrete proposal showing how such a compromise could be accomplished, the "Integrated Epilepsy Classification". This consists of five categories derived to different degrees from both of the classification systems: 1) a "Headline" summarizing localization and etiology for the less specialized users, 2) "Seizure type(s)", 3) "Epilepsy type" (focal, generalized or unknown allowing to add the epilepsy syndrome if available), 4) "Etiology", and 5) "Comorbidities & patient preferences".Entities:
Keywords: 2017 ILAE classification; Classification; Classification merger; Epilepsy classification; Four-dimensional epilepsy; Integrated epilepsy classsifcation; Semiological seizure classification
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32155575 DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2020.02.018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Seizure ISSN: 1059-1311 Impact factor: 3.184