ArticleActa epileptologica2026
Vagus nerve stimulation as an add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy: a prospective, multicenter, real-world study in China.
Article in Acta epileptologica, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been proven as an effective and safe adjunct therapy for epilepsy, but real-world evidence is limited. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of VNS and its cumulative effect through a prospective, multicenter, real-world survey in China, with dynamic follow-up.
methodsA total of 83 sites in China participated and 124 epilepsy patients enrolled. Visits were scheduled at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after VNS. Primary outcomes included seizure response rate (≥ 50% frequency reduction) and seizure-free rate. Secondary outcomes assessed changes in the 31-item Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory (QOILE-31) score, overall anti-seizure medication (ASM) load, and adverse events.
resultsThe responder rates were 35.5%, 41.6%, 62.2%, 64.2%, and 76.6% at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after VNS, respectively. Seizure-free rates were 2.4%, 2.7%, 9.2%, 8.6%, and 10.9% at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, respectively. No significant differences were observed in overall ASM load between baseline and any follow-up visit. Significant improvements were noted in QOLIE-31 from baseline to each follow-up visit, with mean (± SD) score improvements as follows: 1 month (2.93 ± 8.65), 3 months (4.27 ± 9.84), 6 months (4.69 ± 11.5), 9 months (6.68 ± 12.5), and 12 months (9.32 ± 13.8). A significant trend toward improved seizure outcomes and change in quality of life was observed with longer treatment durations. Adverse events occurred in 34 patients (27.4%).
conclusionsVNS is an effective and safe adjunctive treatment for epilepsy, reducing seizure frequency and significantly improving quality of life, with a cumulative effect over time.
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.