首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Epilepsy Currents >Why Is There Still Doubt to Cut It Out?
【2h】

Why Is There Still Doubt to Cut It Out?

机译:为什么仍然有疑问将其删除?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Surgical treatment for epilepsy has made tremendous strides in the past few decades as a result of advances in neurodiagnostics—particularly structural and functional neuroimaging—and improved surgical techniques. This has not only resulted in better outcomes with respect to epileptic seizures and quality of life, and reduced surgical morbidity and mortality, but it has also increased the population of patients now considered as surgical candidates, particularly in the pediatric age range, and enhanced cost-effectiveness sufficient to make surgical treatment available to countries with limited resources. Yet surgical treatment for epilepsy remains arguably the most underutilized of all accepted medical interventions. In the United States, less than 1% of patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy are referred to epilepsy centers.Although the number of epilepsy surgery centers has increased appreciably over the past two decades, the number of therapeutic surgical procedures performed for epilepsy has not increased at all. For patients who are referred, the average delay from onset of epilepsy to surgery is more than 20 years—too late for many to avoid a lifetime of disability or premature death. Not only has there been no consistent message to convince neurologists and primary care physicians to refer patients for surgery, but the increase in epilepsy surgery centers in the United States has appeared to result in a divergence of approaches to surgical treatment. Efforts are still needed to further improve the safety and efficacy of surgical treatment, including the identification of biomarkers that can reliably determine the extent of the epileptogenic region; however, the greatest benefits would derive from increasing access for potential surgical candidates to epilepsy surgery facilities. Information is needed to determine why appropriate surgical referrals are not being made. Consensus conferences are necessary to resolve controversies that still exist regarding presurgical evaluation and surgical approaches. Standards should be established for certifying epilepsy centers as recommended by the Institute of Medicine's report on epilepsy. Finally, the epilepsy community should not be promoting epilepsy surgery per se but instead emphasize that epilepsy centers do more than epilepsy surgery, promoting the message: All patients with disabling pharmacoresistant seizures deserve evaluation by specialists at epilepsy centers who can provide a variety of advanced diagnostic and therapeutic services.
机译:在过去的几十年中,由于神经诊断(尤其是结构和功能性神经成像)的发展以及改进的外科手术技术,癫痫的外科治疗取得了长足的进步。这不仅在癫痫发作和生活质量方面取得了更好的结果,并降低了手术发病率和死亡率,而且还增加了现在被认为是手术候选人的患者人数,尤其是在小儿年龄段,并增加了成本-足以使资源有限的国家获得手术治疗的有效性。然而,在所有公认的医学干预措施中,癫痫的外科治疗仍然可以说是利用最多的。在美国,只有不到1%的耐药性癫痫患者被转诊至癫痫中心。尽管在过去的二十年中,癫痫外科手术中心的数量已明显增加,但用于癫痫的治疗性外科手术的数量却根本没有增加。对于被转诊的患者,从癫痫发作到手术的平均延迟时间超过20年-对许多人来说太迟了,以免终生残疾或过早死亡。不仅没有一致的信息说服神经科医生和初级保健医生转介患者进行手术,而且美国癫痫手术中心的增多似乎导致了手术治疗方法的差异。仍需要进一步提高手术治疗的安全性和有效性的努力,包括鉴定可以可靠确定癫痫发生区域范围的生物标志物;但是,最大的好处将来自增加潜在的手术候选人进入癫痫手术设施的机会。需要信息来确定为什么不进行适当的外科转诊。必须召开共识会议来解决有关术前评估和手术方法的争议。医学研究所关于癫痫的报告中建议,应建立癫痫中心认证的标准。最后,癫痫社区不应本身就在促进癫痫手术,而应强调癫痫中心比癫痫手术做得更多,从而宣传以下信息:所有具有药物抗性癫痫病致残性癫痫发作的患者均应由癫痫中心的专家进行评估,他们可以提供各种先进的诊断方法和治疗服务。

著录项

  • 期刊名称 Epilepsy Currents
  • 作者

    J Engel Jr.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年(卷),期 2013(13),5
  • 年度 2013
  • 页码 198–204
  • 总页数 7
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类 神经病学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号