Epilepsy and cerebral developmental venous anomalies (DVAs): A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cerebral developmental venous anomalies (DVAs) are frequent and rarely symptomatic. When symptomatic, DVAs may present with seizures; however, little is known about the characteristics of DVA-related epilepsy. In this systematic review, we aim to describe the clinical and paraclinical features of patients with DVA-related epilepsy. METHODS: This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021218711). We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed and Scopus databases for case reports/series on patients with DVAs complicated by seizures. Studies describing patients with a potentially epileptogenic comorbid lesion close to their seizure focus were excluded. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to synthetize patient characteristics. The methodological quality of each study was evaluated using a standardized appraisal tool. RESULTS: In total, 66 patients were included from 39 articles. The frontal lobe was the most common location for DVAs. The superior sagittal sinus drained half of the DVAs. Seizures were inaugural in most cases, and the most common manifestations accompanying seizures were headaches. EEG was abnormal in 93% of cases, but only 26% had characteristic epileptic spikes. More than half the patients suffered a medical complication due to their DVA, with hemorrhage and thrombosis being the most common. Refractory seizures were encountered in 19% of individuals. At 12 months of follow-up, 75% of patients were seizure free. Most included studies were at low risk of bias. SIGNIFICANCE: Epilepsy can be a complication of DVAs; these DVAs are mostly frontal or parietal, draining via the superior sagittal sinus or the vein of Galen.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".