SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024
Efficacy and safety of deep brain stimulation in drug resistance epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 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.
- Efficacy and Safety of Acupuncture-Related Therapies for Central Post-Stroke Pain: An Umbrella Review.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Effect of deep brain stimulation on the severity of seizures and the quality of life in patients with multifocal drug-resistant epilepsy in Iran: A pilot review of local experience.Epilepsy & behavior reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the context of drug-resistant epilepsy, deep brain stimulation (DBS) has received FDA approval. However, there have been reports of potential adverse effects, such as depression and memory impairment associated with DBS.This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the impact of DBS on the quality of life (QoL), and seizure frequency of patients who had DRE, and assess its potential adverse events. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and thoroughly assessed databases, including Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, up to 31 July. Statistical analysis, fixed effect model analysis, performed by the Comprehensive Meta-analysis software (CMA) version 3.0. Additionally, Cochran's Q test was conducted to determine the statistical heterogeneity. The systematic review encompassed 54 studies, with 38 studies included in the subsequent meta-analysis. The total number of patients included in the studies was 999. The findings indicated a significant decrease in the mean seizure frequency of subjects following DBS (SMD: 0.609, 95% CI: 0.519 to 0.700, p-value < 0.001). Moreover, patients' QoL significantly improved after DBS (SMD: -0.442, 95% CI: -0.576 to -0.308, p-value < 0.001). The hippocampus displayed the most notable effect size among the different DBS targets. Subgroup analysis based on follow-up duration revealed increased DBS efficacy after two years. There are few reports of adverse events, such as insertional-related complications, infection, and neuropsychiatric complications, but the majority of these were temporary and non-fatal. DBS emerged as an effective and safe procedure for reducing seizure frequency and enhancing the quality of life in DRE patients, with minimal adverse events. Furthermore, the efficacy of DBS was observed to improve over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39557745What 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.