ArticleEpileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape2025
Effect of stereo-EEG versus subdural EEG on functional and seizure outcome in pediatric and adult epilepsy surgery: A 21-year single-center experience.
Article in Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape, 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.
- Beyond Broca and Wernicke: Epilepsy surgery in the language areas.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2026Review
- Effect of stereo-EEG versus subdural EEG on functional and seizure outcome in pediatric and adult epilepsy surgery: A 21-year single-center experience.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective(1) To compare use, benefits, and complications of stereo-EEG (SEEG) and subdural EEG (SD) in presurgical epilepsy candidates. (2) To evaluate the effectiveness of both methods in delineation of the epileptogenic zone (EZ) and guiding tailored resective surgery.
methodsWe included patients with SEEG or SD evaluations in children and adults at the Bethel Epilepsy Centre, Germany, between 2000 and 2020. We retrospectively assessed epilepsy related parameters, main indication of iEEG (intracranial EEG, for identification of the EZ and functional mapping), complications, seizure, and functional outcome. The second objective was addressed by a subgroup analysis in patients with focal cortical dysplasia (FCD) and mild malformation of cortical development with oligodendroglial hyperplasia (MOGHE) for delineation of the EZ.
resultsTwo hundred and nineteen iEEG explorations in 215 patients (age range: 1.3-64.6 years) were assessed (SEEG, n = 78; SD, n = 141). We observed a change in iEEG usage away from SD towards SEEG. In the SEEG group, the decision rate against surgery was higher (SEEG: 23.1% vs. SE: 3.5%, p < .001) and more patients achieved seizure freedom 2 years after surgery (SEEG: 67.8% vs. SD: 46.5%, p = .008). For all iEEG, complications were rare; symptomatic intracranial bleeding only occurred in the SD group (n = 6, 4.3%). In patients with FCD/MOGHE for delineation of the EZ, all patients were operated with favorable seizure freedom after SEEG, but with acceptance of planned neurological deficits (SEEG n = 8, SD n = 20, seizure freedom rate SEEG 87.5% vs. SD 30%, p = .011; neurological deficits: SEEG n = 3 planned motor deficits vs. SD n = 1 unplanned motor deficit due to ischemia). SIGNIFICANCE: SEEG has largely replaced SD in iEEG for the identification of the EZ. It is better tolerated and allows more freedom of choice with respect to resective surgery, resulting in the better identification of surgical candidates and delineation of the EZ with favorable seizure outcomes.
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.