Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38962148›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2024

The comparison of DBS and RNS for adult drug-resistant epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Qinghua Li, Yongzhi Shan, Penghu Wei, Guoguang Zhao

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Qinghua LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yongzhi ShanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Penghu WeiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Guoguang ZhaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Neuromodulation has been proven to be a promising alternative treatment for adult patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) were approved by many countries for the treatment of DRE. However, there is a lack of systematic studies illustrating the differences between them. This meta-analysis is performed to assess the efficacy and clinical characteristics of DBS and RNS in adult patients with DRE. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were retrieved to obtain related studies including adult DRE patients who accepted DBS or RNS. The clinical characteristics of these patients were compiled for the following statistical analysis. Results: A total of 55 studies (32 of DBS and 23 of RNS) involving 1,568 adult patients with DRE were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in seizure reduction and responder rate between DBS and RNS for DRE. The seizure reduction of DBS and RNS were 56% (95% CI 50-62%, Conclusion: Both DBS and RNS are beneficial and alternative therapies for adult DRE patients who are not eligible to accept resection surgery. Further and larger studies are needed to clarify the characteristics of different targets and provide tailored treatment for patients with DRE.

Indexed as

deep brain stimulationepilepsymeta analysisneuromodulationresponsive neurostimulation

Identifiers

PMID38962148
PMCPMC11220164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.