ArticleScientific reports2025
The prognostic value of cortical stimulation induced seizures using stereo EEG in presurgical evaluation of focal epilepsies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Semiology in spontaneous versus cortical stimulation-induced seizures during SEEG: A within-patient comparison study.Epilepsia open · 2026Article
- Multi-expert consensus annotations of spontaneous and stimulation-induced seizures in stereotactic EEG.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The value of stimulation-induced seizures for multimodal determination of the epileptogenic zone in preoperative epilepsy diagnostics has not yet been sufficiently investigated. Patients with focal pharmacorefractory epilepsy who underwent invasive electroencephalography with cortical 50 Hz stimulation at the Epilepsy Center Erlangen between 2018 and 2023, had at least one stimulation-induced seizure, underwent resective epilepsy surgery, and had a postoperative follow-up ≥ 1 year were analyzed. 20 patients were included, 11 (55.0%) with temporal, 7 (35.0%) with frontal and 2 (10.0%) with parietal lobe epilepsy. 12 patients (60.0%) had a good Engel outcome (Engel 1A). Associated with a good vs. poor (Engel 1B-4) surgical outcome were not only the percentage of resected electrode contacts of the spontaneous seizure onset zone, SOZ (p = 0.005), but also the stimulation SOZ (p = 0.022), as well as stimulation-induced seizure with a typical seizure semiology (p = 0.033), the electrodes inducing a stimulation-induced seizure (p = 0.014), electrodes with an identical seizure onset pattern (p = 0.035), and the occurrence of low voltage fast seizure onset pattern, LVFA (p = 0.015). ROC analyses showed that the AUC for the predictors of the spontaneous SOZ were greatest for the stimulation SOZ (AUC 0.876) and stimulation-induced seizures with LVFA (0.860). Analysis of combined predictors showed higher odds of predicting SOZ for combinations including LVFA. Electroclinical stimulation seizures have prognostic value in determining the epileptogenic zone. Characteristics such as the seizure onset zone, seizure pattern and stimulation seizure semiology predict seizure freedom in case of resection of electrode contacts. Electrodes should be resected where both stimulation seizures have been induced or the seizure pattern has been localized and low voltage fast seizure pattern has occurred.
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.