Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32357217›Full record

ArticleNeurosurgery2020

Stereoelectroencephalography Versus Subdural Strip Electrode Implantations: Feasibility, Complications, and Outcomes in 500 Intracranial Monitoring Cases for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.

Holger Joswig, Jonathan C Lau, Mahmoud Abdallat, Andrew G Parrent, Keith W MacDougall, Richard S McLachlan, Jorge G Burneo, David A Steven

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurosurgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Delayed hemorrhage after pediatric stereo-electroencephalography: delayed occurrence or delayed diagnosis?Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Holger JoswigDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Jonathan C LauDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Mahmoud AbdallatDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Andrew G ParrentDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Keith W MacDougallDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Richard S McLachlanDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Jorge G BurneoDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
David A StevenDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBoth stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) and subdural strip electrodes (SSE) are used for intracranial electroencephalographic recordings in the invasive investigation of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

objectiveTo compare SEEG and SSE with respect to feasibility, complications, and outcome in this single-center study.

methodsPatient characteristics, periprocedural parameters, complications, and outcome were acquired from a pro- and retrospectively managed databank to compare SEEG and SSE cases.

resultsA total of 500 intracranial electroencephalographic monitoring cases in 450 patients were analyzed (145 SEEG and 355 SSE). Both groups were of similar age, gender distribution, and duration of epilepsy. Implantation of each SEEG electrode took 13.9 ± 7.6 min (20 ± 12 min for each SSE; P < .01). Radiation exposure to the patient was 4.3 ± 7.7 s to a dose area product of 14.6 ± 27.9 rad*cm2 for SEEG and 9.4 ± 8.9 s with 21 ± 22.4 rad*cm2 for SSE (P < .01). There was no difference in the length of stay (12.2 ± 7.2 and 12 ± 6.3 d). The complication rate was low in both groups. No infections were seen in SEEG cases (2.3% after SSE). The rate of hemorrhage was 2.8% for SEEG and 1.4% for SSE. Surgical outcome was similar.

conclusionSEEG allows targeting deeply situated foci with a non-inferior safety profile to SSE and seizure outcome comparable to SSE.

Indexed as

Drug Resistant EpilepsyStereotaxic TechniquesAdultElectrocorticographyElectrodes, ImplantedFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeurophysiological MonitoringRetrospective StudiesDepth electrodesIntracranial monitoringLeksell frameStereoelectroencephalographySubdural strip electrodes

Identifiers

PMID32357217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.