Faculty Bibliography

The present study examined the relationship between various sociocultural factors (e.g., acculturation, education), neurological variables (e.g., epilepsy duration and seizure frequency) and nonverbal neuropsychological (NP) test performance in a sample of 305 Latino/a and Non-Latino/a White adults with and without epilepsy. All participants completed nonverbal NP measures of visuospatial skills, memory, executive functioning, and psychomotor speed. An acculturation scale was administered to Spanish-speaking epilepsy patients and controls. Education was strongly correlated with performance on all but one of the nonverbal measures across the entire sample. Among Spanish-speaking Latino/a patients with epilepsy, level of acculturation to U.S. culture was associated with a measure of behavioral inflexibility (p < .05) and with a composite measure of nonverbal NP test performance (p < .05). Finally, the results of hierarchical regression models showed that sociocultural factors accounted for a greater proportion of variance in nonverbal NP test performance than did neurological factors. These results provide further evidence that sociocultural factors are strong predictors of NP test performance in clinical populations, even on nonverbal tests. Assessment of acculturation may be as critical as assessment of disease factors in interpreting cognitive performance in Latino/a individuals.

BACKGROUND: Numerous anticonvulsant agents are now available for treating status epilepticus (SE). However, a paucity of data is available to guide clinicians in the initial treatment of seizures or SE. This study describes the current strategies being employed to treat SE in the USA. METHODS: Fifteen American academic medical centers completed a retrospective, multicenter, observational study by reviewing 10-20 of the most recent cases of SE at their institution prior to December 31, 2009. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine factors associated with cessation of seizures. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were included. Most patients with SE had a seizure disorder (58 %). SE patients required a median of 3 AEDs for treatment. Three quarters of patients received a benzodiazepine as first-line therapy (74.7 %). Phenytoin (33.3 %) and levetiracetam (10 %) were commonly used as the second AED. Continuous infusions of propofol, barbiturate, or benzodiazepine were used in 36 % of patients. Median time to resolution of SE was 1 day and was positively associated with presence of a complex partial seizure, AED non-compliance prior to admission, and lorazepam plus another AED as initial therapy. Prolonged ICU length of stay and topiramate therapy prior to admission were negatively associated with SE resolution. Mortality was higher in patients without a history of seizure (22.2 vs 6.9 %, p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a benzodiazepine followed by an AED, such as phenytoin or levetiracetam, is common as first and second-line therapy for SE and appears to be associated with a shorter time to SE resolution. AED selection thereafter is highly variable. Patients without a history of seizure who develop SE had a higher mortality rate.

Purpose: Despite the reported diagnostic value of the intracarotid amobarbital procedure (IAP) or "Wada test" for determining hemispheric lateralization and memory functioning, it has never undergone formal reliability testing because a prospective test-retest study design is neither feasible nor ethical. However, some patients require repeat testing for clinical purposes, a circumstance that allows for exploration of issues related to reliability. The current investigation sought to: (1) evaluate the frequency of and reasons for repeated IAPs and (2) describe the test-retest reliability of repeated IAPs in a large tertiary epilepsy center. Methods: A 10-year review (2001-2011) of the New York University Langone Medical Center Comprehensive Epilepsy Center patient registry revealed 630 IAPs. Review of medical records identified 20 individuals who underwent two or more IAPs on separate days. Because IAPs repeated due to technical problems should be considered separate from IAPs repeated for other reasons because these IAPs likely included a change in the procedure (e.g., lower medication dose) in an attempt to ameliorate the complication, patients were grouped accordingly. Six patients underwent repeated IAPs due to technical complication and 14 patients underwent a repeated IAP due to other reasons (e.g., unexpected memory outcome, reconsideration of surgery years after a previous surgical work-up in which no surgery was performed, and/or consideration of a second surgery). Given that data obtained from injections ipsilateral to a seizure focus are sometimes considered in a manner clinically different from data obtained from injections contralateral to the seizure focus, memory outcome was classified relative to the side of identified seizure focus. The degree to which language and memory data were consistent across repeated IAPs was examined. Key Findings: Language functioning was consistently lateralized across IAPs in all but one case. Among the six patients who experienced technical problems in the first IAP, three were fully participatory in the second procedure such that valid data were obtained. For the other three, the technical problem recurred with no change in outcome across procedures. Among the 14 patients with repeated IAPs due to other reasons, 79% of the available ipsilateral and 73% of the contralateral pass/fail outcomes were consistent across procedures. No difference between ipsilateral or contralateral injections was observed for the likelihood of a change in results (p = 0.57). Significance: Our data identified overall high reliability for both the ipsilateral and contralateral sides with repeated IAP testing. Results indicated that although patients for whom a correctable technical problem was identified during the IAP may benefit from a repeat study, there is little benefit to repeating the IAP in patients with discordant or unexpected results (i.e., results are not likely to change). These data support the overall reliability of both the language and memory data obtained from the IAP.

Rationale: Cortical language mapping involves the identification of essential language cortex, which is typically spared from resection with the goal of preserving postoperative language function. Object naming is the most widely used task for this purpose; however, when stimulation impedes naming, it is unclear whether this reflects impaired access to word meaning (i.e., semantics), word sound (i.e., phonology), or both. This distinction is clinically relevant, with implications for level of disability and amenability to remediation. Two sets of psycholinguistic tasks were administered at sites where stimulation impaired naming to determine whether semantic vs. phonological processes were disrupted. Access to distinct types of word information is critical in the two tasks: information about word meaning in the semantic task, information about word sounds in the phonological task. We hypothesized that semantic and phonological naming sites would be anatomically distinct. Methods: Subjects were 12 pharmacologically intractable, TLE patients (9 female, mean age = 34.8, SD = 11.1) who underwent extraoperative language mapping prior to surgical resection for seizure control. Stimulation mapping tasks included visual object naming and auditory description naming. At sites positive for naming, two psycholinguistic tasks were administered: 1) Semantic task: patients were presented pictured items during stimulation and indicated (via "button press") whether the item belongs to a particular semantic category (e.g., edible, found indoors); 2) Phonological task: patients indicated whether the item name begins with a particular sound (e.g., "p" or "f"). Results: Across patients, we identified 53 naming sites (38 visual naming, 15 auditory naming). Semantic task performance was impaired at 3 of these sites, phonological task performance was impaired at 14 of these sites, and both semantic and phonological task performance were impaired at 7 of these sites. Topographically, phonological-naming sites were broadly distributed across left lateral temporal cortex, whereas semantic and mixed semantic-phonological naming sites were found primarily in the posterior and inferior left temporal region. There was no clear pattern evident in phonological versus semantic processing related to auditory versus visual naming sites. Conclusions: Results suggest that naming impairment related to anterior temporal abnormalities is due primarily to impaired phonological processing, whereas naming impairment resulting from posterior or inferior temporal damage reflects problems with both semantic and phonological processing. As the anterior temporal region is typically most affected in TLE, we speculate that naming difficulty in left TLE primarily reflects problems accessing information regarding word form, with relatively preserved access to word meaning

The Rey-Osterreith Complex Figure (ROCF) is commonly used in evaluations of patients undergoing epilepsy surgery. We assessed test-retest performance on ROCF in 30 partial epilepsy patients (mean interval = 33.7 months) to derive reliable change indices (RCIs) and regression-based measures for change. ROCF reproductions were rescored by three raters (IRR Copy: 0.963; Delayed Recall: 0.986). The derived adjusted RC (90% CI) cutoff values for the ROCF Copy were (<or=-6.5, >or=8.4) and were (<or=-6.8, >or=10.0) for the Delayed Recall. Results from regression-based analyses were negative, using age, education, seizure duration, and age of onset, whereas a baseline score was a significant predictor of a follow-up score. The results provide a means to evaluate long-term outcome in epilepsy patients using the ROCF

The Neuropsychological Screening Battery for Hispanics (NeSBHIS) was developed to address the growing need for linguistically appropriate Spanish-language assessment measures. Despite the potential benefits to clinical practice, no prior study has assessed its diagnostic validity in populations with epilepsy. One hundred and fifteen patients with confirmed epilepsy were evaluated via the NeSBHIS; these data were standardized according to age- and education-based norms. Performance decrements were observed in more than 40% of participants on measures of processing speed and naming. Deficits in verbal and visual recall were also exhibited by 29 and 26% of the sample, respectively. No significant differences in test performance emerged between patients with VEEG evidence of left (N=48) versus right (N=24) temporal lobe epilepsy. Although the NeSBHIS is sensitive to the cognitive impairments commonly observed in populations with epilepsy, there are limitations to its ability to identify lateralized neuropsychological impairment in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy