The Consequences Of Refractory Epilepsy And Its Treatment.

Seizures in some 30% to 40% of patients with epilepsy fail to respond to antiepileptic drugs or other treatments. While much has been made of the risks of new drug therapies, not enough attention has been given to the risks of uncontrolled and progressive epilepsy. This critical review summarizes known risks associated with refractory epilepsy, provides practical clinical recommendations, and indicates areas for future research. Eight international epilepsy experts from Europe, the United States, and South America met on May 4, 2013, to present, review, and discuss relevant concepts, data, and literature on the consequences of refractory epilepsy. While patients with refractory epilepsy represent the minority of the population with epilepsy, they require the overwhelming majority of time, effort, and focus from treating physicians. They also represent the greatest economic and psychosocial burdens. Diagnostic procedures and medical/surgical treatments are not without risks. Overlooked, however, is that these risks are usually smaller than the risks of long-term, uncontrolled seizures. Refractory epilepsy may be progressive, carrying risks of structural damage to the brain and nervous system, comorbidities (osteoporosis, fractures), and increased mortality (from suicide, accidents, sudden unexpected death in epilepsy, pneumonia, vascular disease), as well as psychological (depression, anxiety), educational, social (stigma, driving), and vocational consequences. Adding to this burden is neuropsychiatric impairment caused by underlying epileptogenic processes (essential comorbidities), which appears to be independent of the effects of ongoing seizures themselves. Tolerating persistent seizures or chronic medicinal adverse effects has risks and consequences that often outweigh risks of seemingly more aggressive treatments. Future research should focus not only on controlling seizures but also on preventing these consequences.

Cervical Injuries Scored According To The Subaxial Injury Classification System: An Analysis Of The Literature.

The Subaxial Injury Classification (SLIC) system and severity score has been developed to help surgeons in the decision-making process of treatment of subaxial cervical spine injuries. A detailed description of all potential scored injures of the SLIC is lacking. We performed a systematic review in the PubMed database from 2007 to 2014 to describe the relationship between the scored injuries in the SLIC and their eventual treatment according to the system score. Patients with an SLIC of 1-3 points (conservative treatment) are neurologically intact with the spinous process, laminar or small facet fractures. Patients with compression and burst fractures who are neurologically intact are also treated nonsurgically. Patients with an SLIC of 4 points may have an incomplete spinal cord injury such as a central cord syndrome, compression injuries with incomplete neurologic deficits and burst fractures with complete neurologic deficits. SLIC of 5-10 points includes distraction and rotational injuries, traumatic disc herniation in the setting of a neurological deficit and burst fractures with an incomplete neurologic deficit. The SLIC injury severity score can help surgeons guide fracture treatment. Knowledge of the potential scored injures and their relationships with the SLIC are of paramount importance for spine surgeons who treated subaxial cervical spine injuries.

Management Of Severe Thoracic Impalement Trauma Against Two-wheeled Horse Carriage: A Case Report And Literature Review.

Thoracic injuries in general are of great importance due to their high incidence and high mortality. Thoracic impalement injuries are rare but severe due to the combination of cause, effect and result. This study's primary objective is to report the case of a young man who was impaled by a two-wheeled horse carriage shaft while crashing his motorcycle in a rural zone. An EMT-B ferry was called at the crash scene and a conscious patient was found, sustaining a severe impalement injury to the left hemithorax, suspended over the floor by the axial skeleton with the carriage shaft coming across his left chest. As a secondary objective, a literature review of thoracic impalement injuries is performed. Cases of thoracic impalement injury require unique and individualized care based on injury severity and affected organs. Reported protocols for managing impalement injuries are entirely anecdotal, with no uniformity on impaled patient's approach and management. In penetrating trauma, it is essential not to remove the impaled object, so that possible vascular lesions remain buffered by the object, avoiding major bleeding and exsanguination haemorrhage. Severed impaled thoracic patients should be transferred to a specialist centre for trauma care, as these lesions typically require complex multidisciplinary treatment. High-energy thoracic impalement injuries are rare and hold a high mortality rate, due to the complexity of trauma and associated injuries such as thoracic wall and lung lesions. Modern medicine still seems limited in cases of such seriousness, not always with satisfactory results.