Determination of language dominance in pediatric patients with epilepsy for clinical decision-making: Correspondence of intracarotid amobarbitol procedure and fMRI modalities

2021 ◽  
Vol 121 ◽  
pp. 108041
Author(s):  
Jennifer I. Koop ◽  
Kevin Credille ◽  
Yang Wang ◽  
Michelle Loman ◽  
Ahmad Marashly ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ozgur Dede ◽  
Patrick Bosch ◽  
Austin J. Bowles ◽  
William Timothy Ward ◽  
James W. Roach

Neurosurgery ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 63 (suppl_3) ◽  
pp. A54-A68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin S. Smith ◽  
Christopher I. Shaffrey ◽  
Mark F. Abel ◽  
Christopher P. Ames

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To review the concepts involved in the decision-making process for management of pediatric patients with spinal deformity. METHODS The literature was reviewed in reference to pediatric deformity evaluation and management. RESULTS Pediatric spinal deformity includes a broad range of disorders with differing causes, natural histories, and treatments. Appropriate categorization of pediatric deformities is an important first step in the clinical decision-making process. An understanding of both nonoperative and operative treatment modalities and their indications is requisite to providing treatment for pediatric patients with spinal deformity. The primary nonoperative treatment modalities include bracing and casting, and the primary operative treatments include nonfusion instrumentation and fusion with or without instrumentation. In this article, we provide a review of pediatric spinal deformity classification and an overview of general treatment principles. CONCLUSION The decision-making process in pediatric deformity begins with appropriate diagnosis and classification of the deformity. Treatment decisions, both nonoperative and operative, are often predicated on the basis of the age of the patient and the natural history of the disorder.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Jacobs ◽  
Maya Holsen ◽  
Shirley Chen ◽  
Nicholas Fusco ◽  
Amanda Hassinger

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 938-943
Author(s):  
Soham Dasgupta ◽  
Heather Friedman ◽  
Nicole Allen ◽  
Megan Stark ◽  
Eric Ferguson ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 1086-1093 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis F. Turgeon ◽  
François Lauzier ◽  
Karen E.A. Burns ◽  
Maureen O. Meade ◽  
Damon C. Scales ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Müjgan Arslan ◽  
Murat Yılmaz ◽  
Adnan Karaibrahimoğlu

Abstract Monitoring of levetiracetam is not frequently used in clinical practice. This study evaluated the LEV blood level concentrations, correlation with dose, and co-medication effect to decide the need for blood concentration monitoring in pediatric patients. The children with epileptic seizures on levetiracetam therapy, aged one month-18 years, were enrolled and evaluated for gender, age, body weight, daily drug dose, comedication, and drug concentration records. 57.9% of one hundred and forty patients were on monotherapy. The mean dose of LEV was 35.40 mg/kg/day, while the mean drug concentration was 14.06 μg/ mL. The correlation between the dose and the serum concentration in the polytherapy group was poorly significant, whereas it was positive and highly significant in the monotherapy group. The mean drug concentration was within the established reference range, but concentration monitoring revealed children with serum concentrations below and above the therapeutic range. All cases in our study had the typical range of drug dose per body weight with no side effects. Conclusion: We point out that monitoring is not practical for most patients. Due to its tolerability over an extensive concentration range, the clinical assessment remains the monitoring strategy for patients with epilepsy on LEV therapy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document