ReviewCureus2024
Role of Responsive Neurostimulation in Managing Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimizing Drug-Resistant Epilepsy Management: Cenobamate's role in the Surgery/Neuromodulation Pathway.Drugs in R&D · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug-resistant epilepsy remains a substantial challenge in neurology, affecting patients who do not respond to conventional antiepileptic drugs. Responsive neurostimulation (RNS) has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach, yet comprehensive reviews synthesizing its clinical outcomes are sparse. This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and involved a comprehensive database search through PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus, covering literature up to April 2024. The review targeted peer-reviewed articles evaluating the efficacy, safety, and quality of life impacts of RNS in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Key inclusion criteria encompassed clinical trials, cohort studies, and meta-analyses, while exclusion criteria included non-peer-reviewed and irrelevant studies. We identified five studies meeting our inclusion criteria. These studies collectively demonstrated that RNS significantly reduces seizure frequency and improves quality of life, while maintaining a favorable safety profile. Despite small sample sizes and potential selection biases, the benefits of RNS appeared consistent across diverse patient demographics. RNS represents a viable and effective treatment option for drug-resistant epilepsy, offering significant improvements in seizure control and patient quality of life. Future research should focus on long-term outcomes and refining patient selection to optimize the therapeutic benefits of RNS. The integration of RNS into standard epilepsy management protocols is recommended based on current evidence.
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.