Brandon Santhumayor1, Shefali Karkare2, Sanjeev Kothare2, Shaun Rodgers3. 1. Division of Pediatric Neurosurgery, Cohen Children's Medical Center, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA. bsanthumayor1@pride.hofstra.edu. 2. Division of Pediatric Neurology, Cohen Children's Medical Center, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA. 3. Division of Pediatric Neurosurgery, Cohen Children's Medical Center, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Vagus nerve stimulators (VNS) have emerged as an effective treatment modality for pediatric patients suffering from intractable, drug-resistant epilepsy. Newer devices, AspireSR™ Model 106 and the SenTiva™ Model 1000 (VNS TherapyⓇ, LivaNova™), contain an "auto-stimulation" feature that detects ictal tachycardia and transmits pulsations to attenuate seizures. However, the exact benefits of auto-stimulation compared to its risks still merit further exploration. This study evaluates the utility of these specific devices in a heterogeneous population of pediatric and young adult patients with intractable epilepsy. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of 55 patients who underwent either VNS insertion with or without an auto-stimulation-enabled VNS device at a single level four epilepsy center. Seizure frequency, seizure subtype, side effects, and change in anti-seizure medication load both before and after VNS implantations were collected from patient self-reporting at the time of VNS insertion and 12 months following implantation. Information regarding output current, auto-stimulation current, duty cycling, and auto-stimulation threshold of the device was obtained from documented VNS interrogation for patients with auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices. RESULTS: Patients with auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices had a mean 56.0% (SD = 0.414) seizure frequency reduction 12 months post-VNS insertion, while patients without auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices had a mean 41.6% (SD = 0.456) seizure frequency reduction during the same interval. The mean seizure frequency reduction 12 months post-VNS insertion for patients with a SenTiva™ 1000 model was 66.0% (SD = 0.426). For patients with auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices, post-treatment seizure reduction was significantly correlated with daily auto-stimulation activation (R = 0.432, p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: This study supports the clinical safety and utility of auto-stimulation-enabled VNS models, specifically the SenTiva™ 1000, in treating pediatric patients with intractable epilepsy of various subtypes and etiologies. Further research is needed to evaluate the sustained impact of auto-stimulation on long-term outcomes (≥ 2 years follow-up post-VNS).
PURPOSE: Vagus nerve stimulators (VNS) have emerged as an effective treatment modality for pediatric patients suffering from intractable, drug-resistant epilepsy. Newer devices, AspireSR™ Model 106 and the SenTiva™ Model 1000 (VNS TherapyⓇ, LivaNova™), contain an "auto-stimulation" feature that detects ictal tachycardia and transmits pulsations to attenuate seizures. However, the exact benefits of auto-stimulation compared to its risks still merit further exploration. This study evaluates the utility of these specific devices in a heterogeneous population of pediatric and young adult patients with intractable epilepsy. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of 55 patients who underwent either VNS insertion with or without an auto-stimulation-enabled VNS device at a single level four epilepsy center. Seizure frequency, seizure subtype, side effects, and change in anti-seizure medication load both before and after VNS implantations were collected from patient self-reporting at the time of VNS insertion and 12 months following implantation. Information regarding output current, auto-stimulation current, duty cycling, and auto-stimulation threshold of the device was obtained from documented VNS interrogation for patients with auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices. RESULTS: Patients with auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices had a mean 56.0% (SD = 0.414) seizure frequency reduction 12 months post-VNS insertion, while patients without auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices had a mean 41.6% (SD = 0.456) seizure frequency reduction during the same interval. The mean seizure frequency reduction 12 months post-VNS insertion for patients with a SenTiva™ 1000 model was 66.0% (SD = 0.426). For patients with auto-stimulation-enabled VNS devices, post-treatment seizure reduction was significantly correlated with daily auto-stimulation activation (R = 0.432, p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: This study supports the clinical safety and utility of auto-stimulation-enabled VNS models, specifically the SenTiva™ 1000, in treating pediatric patients with intractable epilepsy of various subtypes and etiologies. Further research is needed to evaluate the sustained impact of auto-stimulation on long-term outcomes (≥ 2 years follow-up post-VNS).
Authors: Patrick Kwan; Alexis Arzimanoglou; Anne T Berg; Martin J Brodie; W Allen Hauser; Gary Mathern; Solomon L Moshé; Emilio Perucca; Samuel Wiebe; Jacqueline French Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2009-11-03 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: E Ben-Menachem; R Mañon-Espaillat; R Ristanovic; B J Wilder; H Stefan; W Mirza; W B Tarver; J F Wernicke Journal: Epilepsia Date: 1994 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Robert S Fisher; Pegah Afra; Micheal Macken; Daniela N Minecan; Anto Bagić; Selim R Benbadis; Sandra L Helmers; Saurabh R Sinha; Jeremy Slater; David Treiman; Jason Begnaud; Pradheep Raman; Bita Najimipour Journal: Neuromodulation Date: 2015-12-13