Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40519226›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2025

Invasive Neurostimulation During Pregnancy for Treatment of Epilepsy and Tourette Syndrome: Maternal and Fetal Outcomes.

Anhmai Vu, Aisha Abdulrazaq, Brian Lundstrom, Lauren M Jackson, Jeffrey W Britton, William O Tatum, Cornelia Drees, Elizabeth A Coon, Linda M Szymanski, Gregory A Worrell and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Anhmai VuSchool of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5068-7332
Aisha AbdulrazaqDepartment of Neurology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6051-4766
Brian LundstromDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5310-5549
Lauren M JacksonDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4167-9489
Jeffrey W BrittonDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0147-8159
William O TatumDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4536-3791
Cornelia DreesDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ; and.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9977-983X
Elizabeth A CoonDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1206-0222
Linda M SzymanskiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3167-4222
Gregory A WorrellDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2916-0553
Kelsey M SmithDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8659-3801

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Invasive neurostimulation is rapidly becoming an established option for treatment of neurologic disorders, particularly those that are refractory to pharmacologic treatment. However, there is limited information on the use of neuromodulation during pregnancy. This study explores the safety and clinical outcomes of invasive neuromodulation-specifically vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS)-in pregnant patients with epilepsy and movement disorders. Methods: Pregnant patients treated with VNS, DBS, or RNS were identified, and charts were reviewed to extract data on maternal epilepsy/movement disorder, treatment, and pregnancy. Results: A total of 14 patients (9 VNS, 3 DBS, 2 RNS) had 22 pregnancies. Neuromodulation indications included focal epilepsy (n = 6: 3 VNS, 2 RNS, 1 DBS), generalized epilepsy (n = 6: all VNS), and Tourette syndrome (n = 2: both DBS). The average age at implantation was 24.7 years for VNS, 29.6 years for DBS, and 28 years for RNS. Pregnancy complications included miscarriages (n = 4 pregnancies; 1 VNS, 2 DBS, 1 RNS), pre-eclampsia with fetal growth restriction (n = 3: 2 VNS, 1 DBS), and gestational diabetes (2 VNS). In addition, 10 pregnancies (8 VNS, 2 RNS) were complicated by seizure exacerbations. Delivery of eight of the pregnancies (5 VNS, 1 DBS, 2 RNS) was by cesarean section. There were no cases of maternal or neonatal mortality, and there were no major congenital malformations. Owing to exacerbated shortness of breath during the third trimester, 1 patient had her VNS turned off. Discussion: Pregnancy complications were consistent with previous reports of patients with neurologic disorders. Despite limitations in sample size and confounding factors related to medication use and neurologic diagnosis, our study suggests that implanted neuromodulation devices do not seem to pose a risk of neuromodulation-related teratogenicity. While these data are promising and may provide some reassurance for patient counseling regarding pregnancy, further studies with larger sample sizes are necessary.

Identifiers

PMID40519226
PMCPMC12161771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.