Neurostimulation in generalized epilepsy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Author:

Haneef Zulfi12ORCID,Skrehot Henry C.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurology Baylor College of Medicine Houston Texas USA

2. Neurology Care Line VA Medical Center Houston Texas USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveThere are three neurostimulation devices available to treat generalized epilepsy: vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS). However, the choice between them is unclear due to lack of head‐to‐head comparisons. A systematic comparison of neurostimulation outcomes in generalized epilepsy has not been performed previously. The goal of this meta‐analysis was to determine whether one of these devices is better than the others to treat generalized epilepsy.MethodsFollowing PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses) guidelines, a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed for studies reporting seizure outcomes following VNS, RNS, and DBS implantation in generalized drug‐resistant epilepsy between the first pivotal trial study for each modality through August 2022. Specific search criteria were used for VNS (“vagus”, “vagal”, or “VNS” in the title and “epilepsy” or “seizure”), DBS (“deep brain stimulation”, “DBS”, “anterior thalamic nucleus”, “centromedian nucleus”, or “thalamic stimulation” in the title and “epilepsy” or “seizure”), and RNS (“responsive neurostimulation” or “RNS” in the title and “epilepsy” or “seizure”). From 4409 articles identified, 319 underwent full‐text reviews, and 20 studies were included. Data were pooled using a random‐effects model using the meta package in R.ResultsSufficient data for meta‐analysis were available from seven studies for VNS (n = 510) and nine studies for DBS (n = 87). Data from RNS (five studies, n = 18) were insufficient for meta‐analysis. The mean (SD) follow‐up durations were as follows: VNS, 39.1 (23.4) months; DBS, 23.1 (19.6) months; and RNS, 22.3 (10.6) months. Meta‐analysis showed seizure reductions of 48.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 38.7%–57.9%) for VNS and 64.8% (95% CI = 54.4%–75.2%) for DBS (p = .02).SignificanceOur meta‐analysis indicates that the use of DBS may lead to greater seizure reduction than VNS in generalized epilepsy. Results from RNS use are promising, but further research is required.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Neurology

Cited by 13 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3