Diagnostic yield of short-term video-EEG monitoring for epilepsy and PNESs: a European assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Although long-term video-EEG monitoring (LVEM) is routinely used to investigate paroxysmal events, short-term video-EEG monitoring (SVEM) lasting <24 h is increasingly recognized as a cost-effective tool. Since, however, relatively few studies addressed the yield of SVEM among different diagnostic groups, we undertook the present study to investigate this aspect. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 226 consecutive SVEM recordings over 6 years. All patients were referred because routine EEGs were inconclusive. Patients were classified into 3 suspected diagnostic groups: (1) group with epileptic seizures, (2) group with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNESs), and (3) group with other or undetermined diagnoses. We assessed recording lengths, interictal epileptiform discharges, epileptic seizures, PNESs, and the definitive diagnoses obtained after SVEM. RESULTS: The mean age was 34 (±18.7) years, and the median recording length was 18.6 h. Among the 226 patients, 127 referred for suspected epilepsy - 73 had a diagnosis of epilepsy, none had a diagnosis of PNESs, and 54 had other or undetermined diagnoses post-SVEM. Of the 24 patients with pre-SVEM suspected PNESs, 1 had epilepsy, 12 had PNESs, and 11 had other or undetermined diagnoses. Of the 75 patients with other diagnoses pre-SVEM, 17 had epilepsy, 11 had PNESs, and 47 had other or undetermined diagnoses. After SVEM, 15 patients had definite diagnoses other than epilepsy or PNESs, while in 96 patients, diagnosis remained unclear. Overall, a definitive diagnosis could be reached in 129/226 (57%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that in nearly 3/5 patients without a definitive diagnosis after routine EEG, SVEM allowed us to reach a diagnosis. This procedure should be encouraged in this setting, given its time-effectiveness compared with LVEM.

Oral cancer treatments and adherence: medication event monitoring system assessment for capecitabine

Background: Oncological treatments are traditionally administered via intravenous injection by qualified personnel. Oral formulas which are developing rapidly are preferred by patients and facilitate administration however they may increase non-adherence. In this study 4 common oral chemotherapeutics are given to 50 patients, who are still in the process of inclusion, divided into 4 groups. The aim is to evaluate adherence and offer these patients interdisciplinary support with the joint help of doctors and pharmacists. We present here the results for capecitabine. Materials and Methods: The final goal is to evaluate adhesion in 50 patients split into 4 groups according to oral treatments (letrozole/exemestane, imatinib/sunitinib, capecitabine and temozolomide) using persistence and quality of execution as parameters. These parameters are evaluated using a medication event monitoring system (MEMS®) in addition to routine oncological visits and semi-structured interviews. Patients were monitored for the entire duration of treatment up to a maximum of 1 year. Patient satisfaction was assessed at the end of the monitoring period using a standardized questionary. Results: Capecitabine group included 2 women and 8 men with a median age of 55 years (range: 36−77 years) monitored for an average duration of 100 days (range: 5-210 days). Persistence was 98% and quality of execution 95%. 5 patients underwent cyclic treatment (2 out of 3 weeks) and 5 patients continuous treatment. Toxicities higher than grade 1 were grade 2−3 hand-foot syndrome in 1 patient and grade 3 acute coronary syndrome in 1 patient both without impact on adherence. Patients were satisfied with the interviews undergone during the study (57% useful, 28% very useful, 15% useless) and successfully integrated the MEMS® in their daily lives (57% very easily, 43% easily) according to the results obtained by questionary at the end of the monitoring period. Conclusion: Persistence and quality of execution observed in our Capecitabine group of patients were excellent and better than expected compared to previously published studies. The interdisciplinary approach allowed us to better identify and help patients with toxicities to maintain adherence. Overall patients were satisfied with the global interdisciplinary follow-up. With longer follow up better evaluation of our method and its impact will be possible. Interpretation of the results of patients in the other groups of this ongoing trial will provide us information for a more detailed analysis.