ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2023
Additional Effect of High-output Current and/or High-duty Cycle in Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Adolescent/Adult Intractable Epilepsy.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A pilot study on the programming protocol of vagus nerve stimulation in children with drug-resistant epilepsy: High pulse amplitude or high duty cycle.Epilepsia open · 2025Trial
- Review
- Epilepsy with Eyelid Myoclonia Complicated by Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: Valproate Withdrawal, Vagus Nerve Stimulation, and Seizure Reduction.NMC case report journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) device delivers electrical pulses to the vagus nerve at a rhythm defined by the duty cycle. The standard therapeutic range is advocated for an output current of 1.5-2.25 mA and a duty cycle of 10%. As the optimal settings vary from patient to patient, some patients may benefit from additional seizure reduction when stimulated beyond the standard range. A total of 74 patients (15 children aged <12 years and 59 adolescents/adults) who underwent VNS implantation between 2011 and 2020 and who were followed up for at least 2 years were included in this retrospective study. Stimulation parameters exceeding 2.25 mA of output current, 25% of duty cycle, and 0.5625 (2.25 mA × 25%) of current × duty cycle were defined as high stimulation. The proportion achieved an additional seizure reduction of 20%, and the 50% seizure reduction rate at the last follow-up was compared between adolescents/adults and children. Approximately 40% of patients in adolescents/adults treated with high stimulation experienced an additional acute effect, resulting in a 50% or greater reduction in seizures in almost all patients. Moreover, in adolescents/adults, 22.2%-41.9% of the patients were treated with high stimulation, and the responder rate was 69.5%. Conversely, the responder rate in children was 26.7%, significantly worse than that in adolescents/adults, despite higher stimulation. VNS with high-stimulation settings is effective for adolescent and adult patients with intractable epilepsy. Even high stimulation may not be effective in extremely refractory pediatric epilepsy with a high seizure frequency.
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.