In this review we systematically assess our currently available knowledge about psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) with an emphasis on the psychological mechanisms that underlie PNES, possibilities for psychological treatment as well as prognosis. Relevant studies were identified by searching the electronic databases. Case reports were not considered. 93 papers were identified; 65 of which were studies. An open non-randomized design, comparing patients with PNES to patients with epilepsy is the dominant design. A working definition for PNES is proposed. With respect to psychological etiology, a heterogeneous set of factors have been identified. Not all factors have a similar impact, though. On the basis of this review we propose a model with several factors that may interact in both the development and prolongation of PNES. These factors involve psychological etiology, vulnerability, shaping, as well as triggering and prolongation factors. A necessary first step of intervention in patients with PNES seems to be explaining the diagnosis with care. Although the evidence for the efficacy of additional treatment strategies is limited, variants of cognitive (behavioural) therapy showed to be the preferred type of treatment for most patients. The exact choice of treatment should be based on individual differences in the underlying factors. Outcome can be measured in terms of seizure occurrence (frequency, severity), but other measures might be of greater importance for the patient. Prognosis is unclear but studies consistently report that 1/3rd to 1/4th of the patients become chronic.

The abnormal, strong functional connectivity in PNES patients provides a neurophysiological correlate for the underlying psychoform and somatoform dissociation mechanism where emotion can influence executive control, resulting in altered motor function (eg, seizure-like episodes).

No abstract

No abstract

Cognitive and behavioural impairments have been observed as a consequence even of single seizures. In individuals with high seizure frequency, such impairments may accumulate and have a much greater impact on daily life than hitherto suspected. In addition, the risk of behavioural impairments is increased for some seizure types, such as secondary generalized seizures. Moreover, for all epilepsy types, increased risk is associated with persistent or poorly controlled seizures. Clinical studies show that cognitive impairments induced by seizures are reversible for most seizure types when seizures are controlled adequately. Additionally, for some seizure types there may be a kind of time window within which impairments are reversible. Exceeding the time window may result in irreversible impairment. These studies suggest that antiepileptic drug treatment can thus protect against such secondary behavioural impairments or at least correct these when seizures are controlled. This emphasizes the need to achieve complete and early seizure control. On the contrary, all antiepileptic drugs have a detrimental effect on the central nervous system and may affect cognitive function, behaviour and mood to some extent. Some treatments may undo the beneficial effects of antiepileptic drug treatment by inducing new or other cognitive impairments. This once more illustrates the need for the emphasis of clinical practice to evolve from mere seizure control to a more comprehensive approach, in which the prevention of central cognitive effects and effects on daily life of both seizures and drugs is given due attention. Optimal management requires a careful balance between, on the one hand, the desire to reach early and maximal seizure control and, on the other, the need to avoid tolerability problems related to cognitive and behavioural impairments. This article reviews how this balance can be achieved for older and newer antiepileptic drugs.