ArticleStereotactic and functional neurosurgery2024
Combination of or Transition between Deep Brain Stimulation and Responsive Neurostimulation for the Treatment of Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.
Article in Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stereo-electroencephalography in the setting of a preexisting deep brain stimulation device: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2025Article
- New and Old Targets: Evolving Framework for Personalized DBS in Refractory Epilepsy.Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionNeuromodulation is an important treatment modality for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not candidates for resective or ablative procedures. However, randomized controlled trials and real-world studies reveal that a subset of patients will experience minimal reduction or even an increase in seizure frequency after neuromodulation. We describe our experience with patients who undergo a second intracranial neuromodulation procedure after unsatisfactory initial response to intracranial neuromodulation.
methodsWe performed a retrospective chart review to identify all patients who had undergone deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) or responsive neurostimulation (RNS), followed by additional intracranial neuromodulatory procedures, with at least 12 months of follow-up. Demographic and clinical data, including seizure frequencies, were collected.
resultsAll patients had temporal lobe epilepsy. Six patients were treated with concurrent ANT DBS and temporal lobe RNS, and 3 patients transitioned between neuromodulation systems. Of the patients treated concurrently with ANT DBS and temporal lobe RNS, 5 of the 6 patients experienced additional reduction in seizure frequency after adding a second neuromodulation system. Of the patients who switched between neuromodulation modalities, all patients experienced further reduction in seizure frequency.
conclusionsFor patients who do not experience adequate benefit from initial therapy with ANT DBS or temporal lobe RNS, the addition of a neuromodulation system or switching to a different form of neuromodulation may allow for additional reduction in seizure frequency. Larger studies will need to be performed to understand whether the use of multiple systems concurrently leads to improved clinical results in patients who are initially treatment resistant to neuromodulation.
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.