ArticleChild's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery2022
Evaluating vagus nerve stimulation treatment with heart rate monitoring in pediatric patients with intractable epilepsy.
Article in Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the outcomes of vagal nerve stimulation in children with drug-refractory epilepsy in South Africa.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in the Management of Seizures in Children.Paediatric drugs · 2026Review
- Response to Fulvio A. Scorza and colleagues.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2022Article
- Vagus nerve stimulation and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: views and evidence.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVagus 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.
methodsThis 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.
resultsPatients 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).
conclusionThis 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).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.