Stereoelectroencephalography versus Subdural Electrode Implantation to Determine Whether Patients with Drug-resistant Epilepsy Are Candidates for Epilepsy Surgery.

Epilepsy is a chronic condition that affects about 50 million individuals worldwide. While its challenges are profound, there are increasing instances where antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) fail to provide relief to epileptic manifestations. For these pharmacoresistant cases, epilepsy surgery often is an effective route for treatment. However, the complexity and challenges associated with presurgical evaluations have prevented more widespread utilization of epilepsy surgery in pharmacoresistant cases. While preliminary work-ups and non-invasive diagnostic imaging have allowed for limited identification of the epileptogenic zone (EZ), there is yet to be an established pre-determined algorithm for surgical evaluation of patients with epilepsy. However, two modalities are currently being used for localization of the EZ and in determining candidates for surgery: stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) and subdural electrodes (SDEs). SDE has been used in the United States for decades; however, SEEG now provides a less invasive option for mapping brain regions. We seek to address which intracranial monitoring technique is superior. Through a review of the outcomes of various clinical studies, SEEG was found to have greater safety and efficiency benefits than SDE, such as lower morbidity rates, lower prevalence of neurological deficits, and shorter recovery times. Moreover, SEEG was also found to have further functional benefits by allowing for deeper targeting of cerebral tissue along with bilateral hemispheric monitoring. This has led to increased rates of seizure freedom and control among SEEG patients. Nevertheless, further studies on the limitations and advancements of SEEG and SDE are still required to provide a more comprehensive understanding regarding their application.