Literature DB >> 33236777

Contemporaneous evaluation of patient experience, surgical strategy, and seizure outcomes in patients undergoing stereoelectroencephalography or subdural electrode monitoring.

Lily H Kim1, Jonathon J Parker1, Allen L Ho1, Austin Y Feng1, Kevin K Kumar1, Kevin S Chen1, Disep I Ojukwu1, Lawrence M Shuer1, Gerald A Grant1,2, Kevin D Graber3, Casey H Halpern1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Intracranial electrographic localization of the seizure onset zone (SOZ) can guide surgical approaches for medically refractory epilepsy patients, especially when the presurgical workup is discordant or functional cortical mapping is required. Minimally invasive stereotactic placement of depth electrodes, stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG), has garnered increasing use, but limited data exist to evaluate its postoperative outcomes in the context of the contemporaneous availability of both SEEG and subdural electrode (SDE) monitoring. We aimed to assess the patient experience, surgical intervention, and seizure outcomes associated with these two epileptic focus mapping techniques during a period of rapid adoption of neuromodulatory and ablative epilepsy treatments.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 66 consecutive adult intracranial electrode monitoring cases at our institution between 2014 and 2017. Monitoring was performed with either SEEG (n = 47) or SDEs (n = 19).
RESULTS: Both groups had high rates of SOZ identification (SEEG 91.5%, SDE 88.2%, P = .69). The majority of patients achieved Engel class I (SEEG 29.3%, SDE 35.3%) or II outcomes (SEEG 31.7%, SDE 29.4%) after epilepsy surgery, with no significant difference between groups (P = .79). SEEG patients reported lower median pain scores (P = .03) and required less narcotic pain medication (median = 94.5 vs 594.6 milligram morphine equivalents, P = .0003). Both groups had low rates of symptomatic hemorrhage (SEEG 0%, SDE 5.3%, P = .11). On multivariate logistic regression, undergoing resection or ablation (vs responsive neurostimulation/vagus nerve stimulation) was the only significant independent predictor of a favorable outcome (adjusted odds ratio = 25.4, 95% confidence interval = 3.48-185.7, P = .001). SIGNIFICANCE: Although both SEEG and SDE monitoring result in favorable seizure control, SEEG has the advantage of superior pain control, decreased narcotic usage, and lack of routine need for intensive care unit stay. Despite a heterogenous collection of epileptic semiologies, seizure outcome was associated with the therapeutic surgical modality and not the intracranial monitoring technique. The potential for an improved postoperative experience makes SEEG a promising method for intracranial electrode monitoring.
© 2020 International League Against Epilepsy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  epilepsy; invasive EEG; phase 2 monitoring; stereoencephalography; subdural

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33236777     DOI: 10.1111/epi.16762

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


  6 in total

1.  First Food and Drug Administration Cleared Thin-Film Electrode for Intracranial Stimulation, Recording, and Monitoring of Brain Activity-Part 1: Biocompatibility Testing.

Authors:  Aura Kullmann; Debra Kridner; Steve Mertens; Mark Christianson; Dave Rosa; Camilo A Diaz-Botia
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 5.152

2.  Comparative Effectiveness of Stereotactic Electroencephalography Versus Subdural Grids in Epilepsy Surgery.

Authors:  Lara Jehi; Marcia Morita-Sherman; Thomas E Love; Fabrice Bartolomei; William Bingaman; Kees Braun; Robyn M Busch; John Duncan; Walter J Hader; Guoming Luan; John D Rolston; Stephan Schuele; Laura Tassi; Sumeet Vadera; Shehryar Sheikh; Imad Najm; Amir Arain; Justin Bingaman; Beate Diehl; Jane de Tisi; Matea Rados; Pieter Van Eijsden; Sandra Wahby; Xiongfei Wang; Samuel Wiebe
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 11.274

3.  Factors Predicting Outcome After Intracranial EEG Evaluation in Patients With Medically Refractory Epilepsy.

Authors:  Adithya Sivaraju; Lawrence Hirsch; Nicolas Gaspard; Pue Farooque; Jason Gerrard; Yunshan Xu; Yanhong Deng; Eyiyemisi Damisah; Hal Blumenfeld; Dennis D Spencer
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 11.800

4.  Probabilistic comparison of gray and white matter coverage between depth and surface intracranial electrodes in epilepsy.

Authors:  Daria Nesterovich Anderson; Chantel M Charlebois; Elliot H Smith; Amir M Arain; Tyler S Davis; John D Rolston
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-17       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Intracranial monitoring contributes to seizure freedom for temporal lobectomy patients with nonconcordant preoperative data.

Authors:  Elisaveta Sokolov; Nathaniel D Sisterson; Helweh Hussein; Cheryl Plummer; Danielle Corson; Arun R Antony; Joseph M Mettenburg; Gena R Ghearing; Jullie W Pan; Alexandra Urban; Anto Bagić; R Mark Richardson; Vasileios Kokkinos
Journal:  Epilepsia Open       Date:  2021-11-16

6.  Approximation Is Not Randomization; Lessons From Comparative Observational Studies of Invasive EEG Methods.

Authors:  David King-Stephens
Journal:  Epilepsy Curr       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 7.500

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.