| Literature DB >> 35070253 |
Siqi Liu1, Zhonghua Xiong1, Jing Wang2, Chongyang Tang1, Jiahui Deng1, Jing Zhang1, Mengyi Guo1, Yuguang Guan1, Jian Zhou1, Feng Zhai1, Guoming Luan1, Tianfu Li3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a therapeutic approach for patients with refractory postencephalitic epilepsy (PEE), which is characterized by drug resistance and disappointing surgical outcomes. However, the efficacy of VNS has not yet been studied in patients with refractory PEE. The present study aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of VNS and evaluate potential clinical predictors in patients with refractory PEE.Entities:
Keywords: efficacy; interictal epileptiform discharges; postencephalitic epilepsy; predictors; vagus nerve stimulation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35070253 PMCID: PMC8771757 DOI: 10.1177/20406223211066738
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ther Adv Chronic Dis ISSN: 2040-6223 Impact factor: 5.091
Figure 1.The representative EEG of refractory PEE patients. (a) Spike-and-wave discharges occurred simultaneously in the left central, parietal, and middle posterior temporal leads in focal IEDs, (b) medium to high amplitude spike-and-wave discharges in non-synchronous, paroxysmal, bilateral front head leads (FP1, F3, F7, M1, T3, FP2, F4, F8, M2, and T4) in multifocal IEDs, (c) irregular spike-and-wave and multi spikeand- wave discharges with medium to high amplitude were observed in the leads of both hemispheres synchronously and symmetrically in generalized IEDs.
Factors associated with PEE patients: univariate analysis.
| Variables | Responder (27) | Non-responder (15) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||
| Male | 17 (62.96%) | 12 (80.00%) | 0.426 |
| Female | 10 (37.04%) | 3 (20.00%) | |
| Etiology | |||
| Viral encephalitis | 23 (85.19%) | 15 (100.00%) | 0.268 |
| Other encephalitis | 4 (14.81%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
| History of brain surgery | |||
| Yes | 5 (18.52%) | 5 (33.33%) | 0.483 |
| No | 22 (81.48%) | 10 (66.67%) | |
| Age at encephalitis | 4.50 (2.00–12.00) | 8.00 (7.00–11.30) | 0.253 |
| History of SE | |||
| Yes | 2 (7.41%) | 1 (6.67%) | 1.000 |
| No | 25 (92.59%) | 14 (93.33%) | |
| Latent period | 0.20 (0.00–3.50) | 0.00 (0.00–0.70) | 0.169 |
| Age at the first unprovoked seizure | 7.90 (3.50–12.30) | 9.80 (6.90–11.90) | 0.713 |
| Types of AEDs | |||
| 1 | 3 (11.11%) | 3 (20.00%) | |
| > 1 and ⩽ 2 | 9 (33.33%) | 4 (26.67%) | |
| ⩾ 3 | 15 (55.56%) | 8 (53.33%) | |
| Duration of AEDs therapy | 2.00 (1.60–7.00) | 7.00 (2.00–13.50) | 0.050 |
| Age at VNS implantation | 16.44 (±10.03) | 20.93 (±9.84) | 0.170 |
| Duration of epilepsy | 2.00 (1.00–7.00) | 8.00 (2.00–13.00) | 0.028
|
| Monthly seizure frequency | |||
| >80 times | 11 (40.74%) | 1 (6.67%) | 0.047
|
| >45 and ⩽ 80 times | 1 (3.70%) | 4 (26.67%) | 0.088 |
| >24 and ⩽ 45 times | 6 (22.22%) | 1 (6.67%) | 0.388 |
| ⩽24 times | 9 (33.33%) | 9 (60.00%) | 0.094 |
| Seizure types | |||
| Focal onset | 23 (85.19%) | 11 (73.33%) | 0.598 |
| Generalized onset | 4 (14.81%) | 4 (26.67%) | |
| Unknow onset | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
| Spatial distribution of IEDs | |||
| Focal* | 17 (62.96%) | 3 (20.00%) | 0.008
|
| Generalized | 10 (37.04%) | 12 (80.00%) | |
| Ictal onset rhythms of EEG | |||
| Focal | 23 (85.19%) | 11 (73.33%) | 0.598 |
| Generalized | 4 (14.81%) | 4 (26.67%) | |
| MRI | |||
| The presence of frontal lobe lesions | 9 (33.33%) | 4 (26.67%) | 0.921 |
| The presence of temporal lobe lesions | 15 (55.56%) | 5 (33.33%) | 0.167 |
| The presence of multifocal lesions | 8 (29.63%) | 6 (40.00%) | 0.495 |
| Cortical sulcal widening | 3 (11.11%) | 1 (6.67%) | 1.000 |
| Non-lesional | 1 (2.38%) | 3 (7.14%) | 0.240 |
| Cortical dysgenesis | 1 (2.38%) | 2 (4.76%) | 0.592 |
| Hippocampal sclerosis | 10 (23.81%) | 3 (7.14%) | 0.426 |
| Follow-up time | 3.17 (1.75–4.00) | 2.08 (1.42–3.42) | 0.156 |
AEDs, antiepileptic drugs; EEG, electroencephalogram; Focal*, focal or multifocal; IEDs, Interictal epileptiform discharges; MRI, magnetic resonance images; SE, status epilepticus; VNS, vagus nerve stimulation.
P < 0.05.
Figure 2.Flow chart. Flow chart for recruiting patients who satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Predictors of efficacy for VNS in PEE patients on multivariate analysis.
| Variables | OR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of epilepsy | 0.955 | 0.856–1.065 | 0.405 |
| Monthly frequency of seizures > 80 times | 24.807 | 2.172–283.280 | 0.010
|
| Focal IEDs | 14.961 | 2.485–90.066 | 0.003
|
CI, confidence interval; IEDs, interictal epileptiform discharges; OR, odds ratio; PEE, postencephalitic epilepsy; VNS, vagus nerve stimulation.
P < 0.05.
Seizure control outcomes by modified Engel and McHugh seizure outcome classifications.
| Class | Modified Engel description | No. of Pts (%) | McHugh description | No. of Pts (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | Seizure-free; rare, nondisabling SPS | 3 (7.14) | 80–100% reduction in seizure frequency | 19 (45.24) |
| II | >90% reduction in seizure frequency; rare CPS | 7 (16.67) | 50%–79% reduction in seizure frequency | 8 (19.05) |
| III | 50%–90% reduction in seizure frequency | 17 (40.48) | < 50% reduction in seizure frequency | 6 (14.28) |
| IV | <50% reduction in seizure frequency | 15 (35.71) | Magnet benefit only | 0 (0.00) |
| V | – | – | No improvement | 9 (21.43) |
CPS, complex partial seizure; SPS, simple partial seizure.
Figure 3.McHugh outcome classification. Seizure outcomes at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up after VNS therapy with McHugh outcome classification. Arrows indicate changes in VNS effectiveness between follow-ups. *Patients lost to follow-up.