↓ Skip to main content

Expert Opinion on the Management of Lennox–Gastaut Syndrome: Treatment Algorithms and Practical Considerations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
136 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Expert Opinion on the Management of Lennox–Gastaut Syndrome: Treatment Algorithms and Practical Considerations
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00505
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Helen Cross, Stéphane Auvin, Mercè Falip, Pasquale Striano, Alexis Arzimanoglou

Abstract

Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a severe epileptic and developmental encephalopathy that is associated with a high rate of morbidity and mortality. It is characterized by multiple seizure types, abnormal electroencephalographic features, and intellectual disability. Although intellectual disability and associated behavioral problems are characteristic of LGS, they are not necessarily present at its outset and are therefore not part of its diagnostic criteria. LGS is typically treated with a variety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies, often in combination. Management and treatment decisions can be challenging, due to the multiple seizure types and comorbidities associated with the condition. A panel of five epileptologists met to discuss consensus recommendations for LGS management, based on the latest available evidence from literature review and clinical experience. Treatment algorithms were formulated. Current evidence favors the continued use of sodium valproate (VPA) as the first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed de novo LGS. If VPA is ineffective alone, evidence supports lamotrigine, or subsequently rufinamide, as adjunctive therapy. If seizure control remains inadequate, the choice of next adjunctive antiepileptic drug (AED) should be discussed with the patient/parent/caregiver/clinical team, as current evidence is limited. Non-pharmacological therapies, including resective surgery, the ketogenic diet, vagus nerve stimulation, and callosotomy, should be considered for use alongside AED therapy from the outset of treatment. For patients with LGS that has evolved from another type of epilepsy who are already being treated with an AED other than VPA, VPA therapy should be considered if not trialed previously. Thereafter, the approach for a de novo patient should be followed. Where possible, no more than two AEDs should be used concomitantly. Patients with established LGS should undergo review by a neurologist specialized in epilepsy on at least an annual basis, including a thorough reassessment of their diagnosis and treatment plan. Clinicians should always be vigilant to the possibility of treatable etiologies and alert to the possibility that a patient's diagnosis may change, since the seizure types and electroencephalographic features that characterize LGS evolve over time. To date, available treatments are unlikely to lead to seizure remission in the majority of patients and therefore the primary focus of treatment should always be optimization of learning, behavioral management, and overall quality of life.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 244 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 11%
Other 25 10%
Student > Postgraduate 22 9%
Student > Bachelor 22 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 7%
Other 51 21%
Unknown 79 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 27%
Neuroscience 29 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 3%
Psychology 6 2%
Other 22 9%
Unknown 91 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 September 2023.
All research outputs
#4,080,552
of 24,378,020 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,505
of 13,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,501
of 324,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#39
of 202 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,378,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 202 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.