1. Invasive neuromodulation for epilepsy: Comparison of multiple approaches from a single center
- Author
-
Juan Luis, Alcala-Zermeno, Nicholas M, Gregg, Keith, Starnes, Jayawant N, Mandrekar, Jamie J, Van Gompel, Kai, Miller, Greg, Worrell, and Brian N, Lundstrom
- Subjects
Adult ,Drug Resistant Epilepsy ,Behavioral Neuroscience ,Epilepsy ,Treatment Outcome ,Anterior Thalamic Nuclei ,Neurology ,Seizures ,Deep Brain Stimulation ,Humans ,Neurology (clinical) ,Child ,Article - Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) patients not amenable to epilepsy surgery can benefit from neurostimulation. Few data compare different neuromodulation strategies. OBJECTIVE: Compare five invasive neuromodulation strategies for treatment of DRE: anterior thalamic nuclei deep brain stimulation (ANT-DBS), centromedian thalamic nuclei DBS (CM-DBS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), chronic subthreshold stimulation (CSS), and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS). METHODS: Single center retrospective review and phone survey for patients implanted with invasive neuromodulation for 2004–2021. RESULTS: N=159 (ANT-DBS=38, CM-DBS=19, RNS=30, CSS=32, VNS=40). Total median seizure reduction (MSR) was 61% for the entire cohort (IQR 5–90) and in descending order: CSS (85%), CM-DBS (63%), ANT-DBS (52%), RNS (50%), and VNS (50%); p=0.07. Responder rate was 60% after median follow-up time of 26 months. Seizure severity, life satisfaction and quality of sleep were improved. Cortical stimulation (RNS and CSS) was associated with improved seizure reduction compared to subcortical stimulation (ANT-DBS, CM-DBS, and VNS) (67% vs. 52%). Effectiveness was similar for focal epilepsy vs generalized epilepsy, closed loop vs open loop stimulation, pediatric vs. adult cases, and high frequency (>100 Hz) vs low frequency (
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF