SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026
Prognostic factors in vagus nerve stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy. Results from a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The aim of the present study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating prognostic factors of response to treatment with VNS implantation in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. We conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines to critically analyze relevant studies. The review question was formulated using the PICO framework: "In patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (P) undergoing VNS implantation (I) and subjected to preoperative and postoperative clinical and instrumental evaluations (C), can prognostic factors for therapeutic response (O) be identified?". As outcome variables for metanalysis evaluation, gender, age at epilepsy onset, age at VNS implantation, focal onset of seizures, epilepsy duration and genetic etiology were evaluated. The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD420261333961). The literature search yielded a total of 900 results. After removing duplicates, 571 papers were screened. Ultimately 39 were deemed relevant. There was a statistically significant association between focal seizures and VNS response (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.02-1.69, p < 0.05), gender (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.26, p < 0.05) and younger age at seizure onset (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.02-0.41, p = 0.028), suggesting a slightly higher probability of response in these subgroups. No significant associations were found for genetic etiology, epilepsy duration, or age at VNS implantation. Heterogeneity was generally low across analyses, except for focal seizures (I2 = 49%). Focal seizures and younger age at epilepsy onset are associated with improved response to VNS therapy. These findings support the role of early patient stratification and suggest that VNS should be considered earlier in selected patients. While several promising biomarkers have been identified, further research is needed to establish their clinical utility and develop more accurate patient selection frameworks.
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.