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.

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.

Canine idiopathic epilepsy is a common neurological disease affecting both purebred and crossbred dogs. Various breed-specific cohort, epidemiological and genetic studies have been conducted to date, which all improved our knowledge and general understanding of canine idiopathic epilepsy, and in particular our knowledge of those breeds studied. However, these studies also frequently revealed differences between the investigated breeds with respect to clinical features, inheritance and prevalence rates. Awareness and observation of breed-specific differences is important for successful management of the dog with epilepsy in everyday clinical practice and furthermore may promote canine epilepsy research. The following manuscript reviews the evidence available for breeds which have been identified as being predisposed to idiopathic epilepsy with a proven or suspected genetic background, and highlights different breed specific clinical features (e.g. age at onset, sex, seizure type), treatment response, prevalence rates and proposed inheritance reported in the literature. In addition, certain breed-specific diseases that may act as potential differentials for idiopathic epilepsy are highlighted.

Common criteria for the diagnosis of drug resistance and the assessment of outcome are needed urgently as a prerequisite for standardized evaluation and reporting of individual therapeutic responses in canine epilepsy. Thus, we provide a proposal for the definition of drug resistance and partial therapeutic success in canine patients with epilepsy. This consensus statement also suggests a list of factors and aspects of outcome, which should be considered in addition to the impact on seizures. Moreover, these expert recommendations discuss criteria which determine the validity and informative value of a therapeutic trial in an individual patient and also suggest the application of individual outcome criteria. Agreement on common guidelines does not only render a basis for future optimization of individual patient management, but is also a presupposition for the design and implementation of clinical studies with highly standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Respective standardization will improve the comparability of findings from different studies and renders an improved basis for multicenter studies. Therefore, this proposal provides an in-depth discussion of the implications of outcome criteria for clinical studies. In particular ethical aspects and the different options for study design and application of individual patient-centered outcome criteria are considered.

BackgroundIntranasal administration of benzodiazepines has shown superiority over rectal administration for terminating emergency epileptic seizures in human trials. No such clinical trials have been performed in dogs.ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of intranasal midazolam (IN‐MDZ), via a mucosal atomization device, as a first‐line management option for canine status epilepticus and compare it to rectal administration of diazepam (R‐DZP) for controlling status epilepticus before intravenous access is available.AnimalsClient‐owned dogs with idiopathic or structural epilepsy manifesting status epilepticus within a hospital environment were used. Dogs were randomly allocated to treatment with IN‐MDZ (n = 20) or R‐DZP (n = 15).MethodsRandomized parallel‐group clinical trial. Seizure cessation time and adverse effects were recorded. For each dog, treatment was considered successful if the seizure ceased within 5 minutes and did not recur within 10 minutes after administration. The 95% confidence interval was used to detect the true population of dogs that were successfully treated. The Fisher's 2‐tailed exact test was used to compare the 2 groups, and the results were considered statistically significant if P < .05.ResultsIN‐MDZ and R‐DZP terminated status epilepticus in 70% (14/20) and 20% (3/15) of cases, respectively (P = .0059). All dogs showed sedation and ataxia.Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceIN‐MDZ is a quick, safe and effective first‐line medication for controlling status epilepticus in dogs and appears superior to R‐DZP. IN‐MDZ might be a valuable treatment option when intravenous access is not available and for treatment of status epilepticus in dogs at home.

BackgroundUnderstanding the efficacy and safety profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in feline epilepsy is a crucial consideration for managing this important brain disease. However, there is a lack of information about the treatment of feline epilepsy and therefore a systematic review was constructed to assess current evidence for the AEDs’ efficacy and tolerability in cats. The methods and materials of our former systematic reviews in canine epilepsy were mostly mirrored for the current systematic review in cats. Databases of PubMed, CAB Direct and Google scholar were searched to detect peer-reviewed studies reporting efficacy and/or adverse effects of AEDs in cats. The studies were assessed with regards to their quality of evidence, i.e. study design, study population, diagnostic criteria and overall risk of bias and the outcome measures reported, i.e. prevalence and 95% confidence interval of the successful and affected population in each study and in total.ResultsForty studies describing clinical outcomes of AEDs’ efficacy and safety were included. Only two studies were classified as “blinded randomised controlled trials”. The majority of the studies offered high overall risk of bias and described low feline populations with unclear diagnostic criteria and short treatment or follow-up periods. Individual AED assessments of efficacy and safety profile showed that phenobarbital might currently be considered as the first choice AED followed by levetiracetam and imepitoin. Only imepitoin’s safety profile was supported by strong level of evidence. Imepitoin’s efficacy as well as remaining AEDs’ efficacy and safety profile were supported by weak level of evidence.ConclusionsThis systematic review reflects an evidence-based assessment of the published data on the AEDs’ efficacy and safety for feline epilepsy. Currently, phenobarbital is likely to be the first-line for feline epileptic patients followed by levetiracetam and imepitoin. It is essential that clinicians evaluate both AEDs’ effectiveness and tolerability before tailoring AED to the individual patient. Further studies in feline epilepsy treatment are by far crucial in order to establish definite guidelines for AEDs’ efficacy and safety.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12917-018-1386-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A transfrontal craniotomy with excision of the meningoencephalocele and closure of the defect can be an effective treatment for an intranasal meningoencephalocele in dogs.