Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39719976›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024

Medial pulvinar stimulation for focal drug-resistant epilepsy: interim 12-month results of the PULSE study.

Francesca Pizzo, Romain Carron, Virginie Laguitton, Audrey Clement, Bernard Giusiano, Fabrice Bartolomei

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04692701 (Pulvinar Stimulation in Epilepsy), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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.

NCT04692701 nacompletednot on this map

Pulvinar Stimulation in Epilepsy: a Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssistance Publique Hopitaux De MarseilleRan2021 to 2026Enrolled12ConditionsEpilepsyArmsPulvinar deep brain stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A guide to neuromodulation in drug-resistant epilepsy.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Thalamocortical network dynamics in focal epilepsy: SEEG investigation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Biomarkers for Epilepsy Deep Brain Stimulation.Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2025
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

6 authors.

Francesca Pizzo *Department of Epileptology and Cerebral Rhythmology, APHM, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France.
Romain Carron *Department of Epileptology and Cerebral Rhythmology, APHM, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France.
Virginie LaguittonDepartment of Epileptology and Cerebral Rhythmology, APHM, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France.
Audrey ClementDepartment of Epileptology and Cerebral Rhythmology, APHM, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France.
Bernard GiusianoDepartment of Epileptology and Cerebral Rhythmology, APHM, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France.
Fabrice BartolomeiDepartment of Epileptology and Cerebral Rhythmology, APHM, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the medial pulvinar nucleus (PuM) in reducing seizure frequency and addressing comorbidities in patients with drug and vagal nerve-resistant focal epilepsy. Methods: This is an open-label prospective treatment trial with a planned enrollment of 12 patients suffering from medically refractory epilepsy (Clinical trial gov NCT04692701), for which the interim 12-month post-implantation results for the first 6 patients are being reported. Inclusion criteria were focal epilepsy not suitable for or after failed surgical intervention and previous failure of neurostimulation therapies (vagus nerve stimulation or anterior thalamic nucleus DBS). Evaluations included seizure diaries, neuropsychological assessments, and scales for depression, anxiety, quality of life, and seizure severity. PuM DBS was performed using ROSA robotic assistance, with follow-ups every 3 months for 1 year. Results: Out of six patients, five completed 1-year follow-up (one patient died prematurely). A non-significant trend toward seizure reduction was observed at 6 months, becoming more pronounced at 1 year (mean reduction: 45%; responders: 2/5). Seizure severity significantly improved ( Significance: Preliminary results suggest that PuM DBS may offer a promising therapeutic option for reducing seizure severity and improving quality of life and cognitive functions in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Despite the small sample size and the presence of serious adverse events, the findings warrant further investigation with larger cohorts to confirm these trends and optimize the treatment protocol.

Indexed as

deep brain stimulationepilepsy comorbiditiesneuromodulationquality of life in epilepsyseizure reduction

Identifiers

PMID39719976
PMCPMC11667892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.