Literature DB >> 28744855

Seizure outcome after hippocampal deep brain stimulation in patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy: A prospective, controlled, randomized, double-blind study.

Arthur Cukiert1,2, Cristine Mella Cukiert2, Jose Augusto Burattini2, Pedro Paulo Mariani2, Daniela Fontes Bezerra1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We designed a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the efficacy of hippocampal deep brain stimulation (Hip-DBS) in patients with refractory temporary lobe epilepsy (TLE).
METHODS: Sixteen adult patients with refractory TLE were studied. Patient's workup included medical history, interictal and ictal electroencephalography (EEG), and high-resolution 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients were randomized on a 1:1 proportion to an active (stimulation on) or to a control (no stimulation) arm. After implantation, patients were allowed to recover for 1 month, which was followed by a 1-month titration (or sham) period. The 6-month blinded phase started immediately afterward. A postoperative MRI confirmed the electrode's position in all patients. All patients received bipolar continuous stimulation. Stimulus duration was 300 μs and frequency was 130 Hz; final intensity was 2 V. Patients were considered responders when they had at least 50% seizure frequency reduction.
RESULTS: All patients had focal impaired awareness seizures (FIAS, complex partial seizures), and 87% had focal aware seizures (FAS, simple partial seizures). Mean preoperative seizure frequency was 12.5 ± 9.4 (mean ± standard deviation) per month. MRI findings were normal in two patients, disclosed bilateral mesial temporal sclerosis (MTS) in three, left MTS in five, and right MTS in six patients. An insertional effect could be noted in both control and active patients. In the active group (n = 8), four patients became seizure-free; seven of eight were considered responders and one was a nonresponder. There was a significant difference regarding FIAS frequency between the two groups from the first month of full stimulation (p < 0.001) until the end of the blinded phase (p < 0.001). This was also true for FAS, except for the third month of the blinded phase. SIGNIFICANCE: Hip-DBS was effective in significantly reducing seizure frequency in patients with refractory TLE in the active group, as compared to the control group. Fifty-percent of the patients in the active group became seizure-free. The present study is the larger prospective, controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the effects of Hip-DBS published to date. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
© 2017 International League Against Epilepsy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  zzm321990DBSzzm321990; Epilepsy; Hippocampus; Outcome

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28744855     DOI: 10.1111/epi.13860

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epilepsia        ISSN: 0013-9580            Impact factor:   5.864


  15 in total

1.  Long-term efficacy and cognitive effects of bilateral hippocampal deep brain stimulation in patients with drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy.

Authors:  Shu Wang; Meng Zhao; Tianfu Li; Chunsheng Zhang; Jian Zhou; Mengyang Wang; Xiongfei Wang; Kaiqiang Ma; Guoming Luan; Yuguang Guan
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 3.307

Review 2.  Comparison and Selection of Current Implantable Anti-Epileptic Devices.

Authors:  Stephen Wong; Ram Mani; Shabbar Danish
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 7.620

Review 3.  Neurostimulation as a Method of Treatment and a Preventive Measure in Canine Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Current State and Future Prospects.

Authors:  Marta Nowakowska; Muammer Üçal; Marios Charalambous; Sofie F M Bhatti; Timothy Denison; Sebastian Meller; Gregory A Worrell; Heidrun Potschka; Holger A Volk
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2022-06-16

4.  Identifying the neural network for neuromodulation in epilepsy through connectomics and graphs.

Authors:  Artur Vetkas; Jürgen Germann; Gavin Elias; Aaron Loh; Alexandre Boutet; Kazuaki Yamamoto; Can Sarica; Nardin Samuel; Vanessa Milano; Anton Fomenko; Brendan Santyr; Jordy Tasserie; Dave Gwun; Hyun Ho Jung; Taufik Valiante; George M Ibrahim; Richard Wennberg; Suneil K Kalia; Andres M Lozano
Journal:  Brain Commun       Date:  2022-04-06

Review 5.  Invasive Neuromodulation for the Treatment of Pediatric Epilepsy.

Authors:  Laureen D Hachem; Han Yan; George M Ibrahim
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 7.620

6.  Epilepsy and Neuromodulation-Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Churl-Su Kwon; Valeria Ripa; Omar Al-Awar; Fedor Panov; Saadi Ghatan; Nathalie Jetté
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2018-04-18

7.  Towards an Online Seizure Advisory System-An Adaptive Seizure Prediction Framework Using Active Learning Heuristics.

Authors:  Vignesh Raja Karuppiah Ramachandran; Huibert J Alblas; Duc V Le; Nirvana Meratnia
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 3.576

8.  Short-Term Amygdala Low-Frequency Stimulation Does not Influence Hippocampal Interneuron Changes Observed in the Pilocarpine Model of Epilepsy.

Authors:  István Mihály; Tímea Molnár; Ádám-József Berki; Réka-Barbara Bod; Károly Orbán-Kis; Zsolt Gáll; Tibor Szilágyi
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 6.600

Review 9.  Neuromodulation in Drug Resistant Epilepsy.

Authors:  Natalia Rincon; Donald Barr; Naymee Velez-Ruiz
Journal:  Aging Dis       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 6.745

Review 10.  How technology is driving the landscape of epilepsy surgery.

Authors:  Christian Dorfer; Bertil Rydenhag; Gordon Baltuch; Vivek Buch; Jeffrey Blount; Robert Bollo; Jason Gerrard; Daniel Nilsson; Karl Roessler; James Rutka; Ashwini Sharan; Dennis Spencer; Arthur Cukiert
Journal:  Epilepsia       Date:  2020-03-29       Impact factor: 6.740

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.