Dogs with epilepsy are among the commonest neurological patients in veterinary practice and therefore have historically attracted much attention with regard to definitions, clinical approach and management. A number of classification proposals for canine epilepsy have been published during the years reflecting always in parts the current proposals coming from the human epilepsy organisation the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). It has however not been possible to gain agreed consensus, “a common language”, for the classification and terminology used between veterinary and human neurologists and neuroscientists, practitioners, neuropharmacologists and neuropathologists. This has led to an unfortunate situation where different veterinary publications and textbook chapters on epilepsy merely reflect individual author preferences with respect to terminology, which can be confusing to the readers and influence the definition and diagnosis of epilepsy in first line practice and research studies.In this document the International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force (IVETF) discusses current understanding of canine epilepsy and presents our 2015 proposal for terminology and classification of epilepsy and epileptic seizures. We propose a classification system which reflects new thoughts from the human ILAE but also roots in former well accepted terminology. We think that this classification system can be used by all stakeholders.

This article outlines the consensus proposal on diagnosis of epilepsy in dogs by the International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force. The aim of this consensus proposal is to improve consistency in the diagnosis of epilepsy in the clinical and research settings. The diagnostic approach to the patient presenting with a history of suspected epileptic seizures incorporates two fundamental steps: to establish if the events the animal is demonstrating truly represent epileptic seizures and if so, to identify their underlying cause. Differentiation of epileptic seizures from other non-epileptic episodic paroxysmal events can be challenging. Criteria that can be used to make this differentiation are presented in detail and discussed. Criteria for the diagnosis of idiopathic epilepsy (IE) are described in a three-tier system. Tier I confidence level for the diagnosis of IE is based on a history of two or more unprovoked epileptic seizures occurring at least 24 h apart, age at epileptic seizure onset of between six months and six years, unremarkable inter-ictal physical and neurological examination, and no significant abnormalities on minimum data base blood tests and urinalysis. Tier II confidence level for the diagnosis of IE is based on the factors listed in tier I and unremarkable fasting and post-prandial bile acids, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain (based on an epilepsy-specific brain MRI protocol) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis. Tier III confidence level for the diagnosis of IE is based on the factors listed in tier I and II and identification of electroencephalographic abnormalities characteristic for seizure disorders. The authors recommend performing MRI of the brain and routine CSF analysis, after exclusion of reactive seizures, in dogs with age at epileptic seizure onset <6 months or >6 years, inter-ictal neurological abnormalities consistent with intracranial neurolocalisation, status epilepticus or cluster seizure at epileptic seizure onset, or a previous presumptive diagnosis of IE and drug-resistance with a single antiepileptic drug titrated to the highest tolerable dose.This consensus article represents the basis for a more standardised diagnostic approach to the seizure patient. These recommendations will evolve over time with advances in neuroimaging, electroencephalography, and molecular genetics of canine epilepsy.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12917-015-0462-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread, early, ideally real-time, identification of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals is pivotal in interrupting infection chains. Volatile organic compounds produced during respiratory infections can cause specific scent imprints, which can be detected by trained dogs with a high rate of precision. Methods: Eight detection dogs were trained for 1 week to detect saliva or tracheobronchial secretions of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in a randomised, double-blinded and controlled study. Results: The dogs were able to discriminate between samples of infected (positive) and non-infected (negative) individuals with average diagnostic sensitivity of 82.63% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.02-83.24%) and specificity of 96.35% (95% CI: 96.31-96.39%). During the presentation of 1012 randomised samples, the dogs achieved an overall average detection rate of 94% (±3.4%) with 157 correct indications of positive, 792 correct rejections of negative, 33 incorrect indications of negative or incorrect rejections of 30 positive sample presentations. Conclusions: These preliminary findings indicate that trained detection dogs can identify respiratory secretion samples from hospitalised and clinically diseased SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals by discriminating between samples from SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and negative controls. This data may form the basis for the reliable screening method of SARS-CoV-2 infected people.

In Europe, the number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed for dogs has grown considerably over the last years. Nevertheless, the same questions remain, which include, 1) when to start treatment, 2) which drug is best used initially, 3) which adjunctive AED can be advised if treatment with the initial drug is unsatisfactory, and 4) when treatment changes should be considered. In this consensus proposal, an overview is given on the aim of AED treatment, when to start long-term treatment in canine epilepsy and which veterinary AEDs are currently in use for dogs. The consensus proposal for drug treatment protocols, 1) is based on current published evidence-based literature, 2) considers the current legal framework of the cascade regulation for the prescription of veterinary drugs in Europe, and 3) reflects the authors’ experience. With this paper it is aimed to provide a consensus for the management of canine idiopathic epilepsy. Furthermore, for the management of structural epilepsy AEDs are inevitable in addition to treating the underlying cause, if possible.

Epidemiological evaluation of canine epilepsy is an under-researched area. The objectives of this study were to estimate prevalence and investigate risk factors for epilepsy of unknown origin (EUO) among dogs attending primary veterinary practices in the UK. The clinical data analysed spanned a two-year period and included all dogs attending 92 primary veterinary clinics participating in the VetCompass project. Five hundred and thirty-nine EUO cases were identified giving a prevalence of 0.62% (95% CI 0.57% to 0.67%). Males were over 1.5 times as likely to have EUO compared with females (95% CI 1.44 to 2.06; P < 0.001). Of purebred dogs, the border terrier had 2.70 (95% CI 1.57 to 4.62; P < 0.001) and the German shepherd dog had 1.90 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.80; P=0.001) times increased odds of EUO compared with crossbred dogs. In addition, the West Highland white terrier had reduced odds (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.62; P=0.004) of EUO compared with crossbred dogs (likelihood ratio test P < 0.0001). No association was found with neuter status, colour or weight. The current study highlights the clinical importance of epilepsy as a canine disorder in the UK. Increased awareness of sex and breed predispositions may assist clinicians with diagnosis. Further research is merited to evaluate the specific breed associations identified.

This report represents a scientific and working clinical consensus statement on seizure management in dogs based on current literature and clinical expertise. The goal was to establish guidelines for a predetermined, concise, and logical sequential approach to chronic seizure management starting with seizure identification and diagnosis (not included in this report), reviewing decision‐making, treatment strategies, focusing on issues related to chronic antiepileptic drug treatment response and monitoring, and guidelines to enhance patient response and quality of life. Ultimately, we hope to provide a foundation for ongoing and future clinical epilepsy research in veterinary medicine.

No abstract

BackgroundThe safety profile of anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) is an important consideration for the regulatory bodies, owners and prescribing clinicians. Information on their adverse effects still remains limited. A systematic review including a meta-analytic approach was designed to evaluate existing evidence for the safety profile of AEDs in canine patients. Electronic searches of PubMed, CAB Direct and Google scholar were carried out without date or language restrictions. Conference proceedings were also searched. Peer-reviewed full-length studies reporting adverse effects of AEDs in epileptic and healthy non-epileptic dogs were included. Studies were allocated to three groups based on their design. Individual studies were evaluated based on the quality of evidence (study design, study group sizes, subject enrolment quality and overall risk of bias) and the outcome measures reported (proportion of specific adverse effects for each AED, prevalence and 95 % confidence interval of the affected population in each study and comparative odds ratio of adverse effects for AEDs).ResultsNinety studies, including six conference proceedings, reporting clinical outcomes of AEDs’ adverse effects were identified. Few studies were designed as blinded randomised controlled clinical trials. Many studies included low canine populations with unclear criteria of subject enrolment and short treatment periods. Direct comparisons suggested that imepitoin and levetiracetam might have a better safety profile than phenobarbital, whilst the latter might have a better safety profile than potassium bromide. However, none of these comparisons showed a statistically significant difference. Comparisons between other AEDs were not possible as a considerable amount of studies lacked power calculations or adequate data to allow further statistical analysis. Individual AED assessments indicated that levetiracetam might be one of the safest AEDs, followed by imepitoin and then phenobarbital and potassium bromide; these findings were all supported by a strong level of evidence. The safety profile in other AEDs was variable, but weak evidence was found to permit firm conclusions or to compare their safety to other AEDs.ConclusionsThis systematic review provides objective evaluation of the most commonly used AEDs’ adverse effects. Adverse effects usually appeared mild in all AEDs and subsided once doses and/or serum levels were monitored or after the AED was withdrawn. Although phenobarbital might be less safe than imepitoin and levetiracetam, there was insufficient evidence to classify it as an AED with a high risk of major adverse effects. It is important for clinicians to evaluate both AEDs’ effectiveness and safety on an individual basis before the selection of the appropriate monotherapy or adjunctive AED therapy.