Effectiveness of vagal nerve stimulation in medication-resistant epilepsy. Comparison between patients with and without medication changes

Comparative Efficacy of Neuromodulatory Strategies for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The study aims to evaluate the efficacy of neuromodulatory strategies for people who have drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE).

METHODS

We searched electronic repositories, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, for randomized controlled trials, their ensuing open-label extension studies, and prospective studies focusing on surgical or neuromodulation interventions for people with DRE. We used seizure frequency reduction as the primary outcome. A single-arm meta-analysis synthesized data across all studies to assess treatment effectiveness at multiple time points. A network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of diverse therapies in randomized controlled trials. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations was applied to evaluate the overall quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies representing 2936 individuals underwent 10 treatments were included. Based on the cumulative ranking in the network meta-analysis, the top 3 neuromodulatory options were deep brain stimulation (DBS) with 27% probability, responsive neurostimulation (RNS) with 22.91%, and transcranial direct current stimulation with 24.31%. In the single-arm meta-analysis, in the short-to-medium term, seizure control is more effective with RNS than with invasive vagus nerve stimulation (inVNS), which in turn is slightly more effective than DBS, though the differences are minimal. However, in the long term, inVNS appears to be less effective than both DBS and RNS. Trigeminal nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcranial alternating current stimulation did not demonstrate significant seizure frequency reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding long-term efficacy, RNS and DBS outperformed inVNS. While transcranial direct current stimulation and transcutaneous auricular VNS showed promise for treating DRE, further studies are needed to confirm their long-term efficacy.

Long-Term Seizure Outcome With or Without Vagal Nerve Stimulation Therapy

Background and Objectives

To compare long-term seizure control in patients with long-term VNS (vagal nerve stimulator) stimulation (VNS-on) with those who discontinued VNS after >3 years (VNS-off).

Methods

Patients with refractory epilepsy with VNS therapy for >3 years (and follow-up for >2 years after VNS discontinuation for VNS-off patients) were included. Patients with brain surgery <3 years after VNS were excluded. We compared the percentage of patients with ≥50% seizure reduction (50% responder rate) and change in seizure frequency within and between groups in follow-up.

Results

Thirty-three VNS-on and 16 VNS-off patients were evaluated. VNS-on patients underwent stimulation for 9.7 years (mean). VNS-off patients had VNS treatment for 6.5 years (mean), discontinued treatment, then had additional 8.0 years (mean) follow-up. 50% responder rates were similar between groups (VNS-on: 54.5% vs VNS-off at last-on: 37.5%, p = 0.26; vs VNS-off at the last follow-up: 62.5%, p = 0.60). VNS-on patients had a significant reduction in seizure frequency at the last follow-up compared with baseline (median [Mdn] = -4.5 seizures/month, interquartile range [IQR] = 14.0, 56% reduction, p = 0.013). VNS-off patients also showed significant seizure reduction while still continuing VNS therapy (Mdn = -1.0 seizures/month, IQR = 13.0, 35% reduction, p = 0.020) and, after discontinuing therapy, at the last follow-up compared with baseline (Mdn = -3.2, IQR = 11.0, 52% reduction, p = 0.020). The 2 groups were comparable in seizure frequency change both at the last-on visit (absolute change, p = 0.62; relative change, p = 0.50) at the last follow-up (absolute change, p = 0.67; relative change, p = 0.76).

Discussion

Patients who discontinued VNS therapy and those who continued therapy had similar response during active treatment and similar long-term outcomes, suggesting that factors such as the natural disease course and/or medication treatment strongly affect long-term outcomes.

Long-term outcome of epileptic dogs treated with implantable vagus nerve stimulators

BACKGROUND

The long-term effect of implantable vagus nerve stimulators (VNS) on seizures has not been evaluated in epileptic dogs.

OBJECTIVES

Report seizure frequency in medication-resistant epileptic dogs before and after VNS implantation.

ANIMALS

Twelve client-owned dogs with idiopathic epilepsy and >1 seizure day per 3 weeks despite 3 months of appropriate use of 2 antiseizure medications and seizure diaries maintained 6 months before and >12 months after VNS implantation.

METHODS

Uncontrolled, open-label, before and after study. Mean monthly seizures and inter-seizure periods obtained from contemporaneous seizure diaries in the 6 months before implantation were compared with 0 to 6 months, 7 to 12 months, and subsequent 12-month periods after implantation. The number of dogs with >50% decrease in seizure frequency, >3 times increase in inter-ictal period interval, and seizure freedom for >3 months at the time of death or last follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

Five of 12 dogs were euthanized <12 months after implantation. All 7 remaining dogs showed >50% decrease in seizure frequency until last follow-up, starting at a median of 37 to 48 months after implantation (range, 0-6 to 61-72 months) and a >3-fold increase in mean inter-seizure interval starting a median of 25 to 36 months after implantation (range, 0-6 months to 49-60 months), 3/7 dogs were seizure-free at death or last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

Monthly seizure frequencies decreased and inter-seizure intervals increased in all dogs 2 to 3 years after VNS implantation, but a high proportion were euthanized before this time point. Prospective clinical trials are required to establish causality and the magnitude of this association.

Synergistic effects of vagus nerve stimulation and antiseizure medication

INTRODUCTION

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an effective, non-pharmacological therapy for epileptic seizures. Until now, favorable combinations of different groups of antiseizure medication (ASM) and VNS have not been sufficiently addressed. The aim of this study was to identify the synergistic effects between VNS and different ASMs.

METHODS

We performed an observational study of patients with epilepsy who were implanted with VNS and had a stable ASM therapy during the first 2 years after the VNS implantation. Data were collected from the Mainz Epilepsy Registry. The efficacy of VNS depending on the concomitantly used ASM group/individual ASMs was assessed by quantifying the responder rate (≥ 50% seizure reduction compared to the time of VNS implantation) and seizure freedom (absence of seizures during the last 6 months of the observation period).

RESULTS

One hundred fifty one patients (mean age 45.2 ± 17.0 years, 78 females) were included in the study. Regardless of the used ASM, the responder rate in the whole cohort was 50.3% and the seizure freedom was 13.9%. Multiple regression analysis showed that combination of VNS with synaptic vesicle glycoprotein (SV2A) modulators (responder rate 64.0%, seizure freedom 19.8%) or slow sodium channel inhibitors (responder rate 61.8%, seizure freedom 19.7%) was associated with a statistically significant better responder rate and seizure freedom than combinations of VNS and ASM with other mechanism of action. Within these ASM groups, brivaracetam showed a more favorable effect than levetiracetam, whereas lacosamide and eslicarbazepine were comparable in their effects.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the combination of VNS with ASMs belonging to either SV2A modulators or slow sodium channel inhibitors could be optimal to achieve a better seizure control following VNS. However, these preliminary data require further validation under controlled conditions.

[Results of vagus nerve stimulator implantation in children and adolescents with treatment-refractory epilepsy]

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a therapeutic procedure that can be applied in a palliative setting in patients with treatment-refractory epilepsy who are not suitable for epilepsy surgery. The mechanism of action of VNS is currently not completely understood but appears to depend on a modification of neurotransmitter metabolism. Data of 25 patients with treatment-refractory epilepsy who underwent implantation of a vagus nerve stimulator were retrospectively analyzed in a monocentric study. A reduction in epileptic seizure rate of 28% was observed 3 months after initial activation and of 32.9% after 6-12 months. The responder rate (reduction in seizure rate of more than 50% compared to before implantation) was 40% 6-12 months after initial activation. In one third of patients, a reduction in epileptic seizure rate of at least 75% occurred. Adverse effects of surgery or the stimulation were rare.

Neurostimulation in People with Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from the ILAE Surgical Therapies Commission

OBJECTIVE

Summarize the current evidence on efficacy and tolerability of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We followed the PRISMA reporting standards and searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included published randomized controlled trials (RCT) and their corresponding open-label extension studies, as well as prospective case series, with ≥ 20 participants (excluding studies limited to children). Our primary outcome was the mean (or median when unavailable) percentage decrease in frequency, as compared to baseline, of all epileptic seizures at last follow-up. Secondary outcomes included proportion of treatment responders and proportion with seizure freedom.

RESULTS

We identified 30 eligible studies, six of which were RCTs. At long-term follow-up (mean 1.3 years), five observational studies for VNS reported a pooled mean percentage decrease in seizure frequency of 34.7% (95% CI: -5.1, 74.5). In the open-label extension studies for RNS, the median seizure reduction was 53%, 66%, and 75% at two, five, and nine years of follow-up, respectively. For DBS, the median reduction was 56%, 65%, and 75% at two, five, and seven years, respectively. The proportion of individuals with seizure freedom at last follow-up increased significantly over time for DBS and RNS while a positive trend was observed for VNS. Quality of life was improved in all modalities. The most common complications included hoarseness, cough and throat pain for VNS and implant site pain, headache, and dysesthesia for DBS and RNS.

SIGNIFICANCE

Neurostimulation modalities are an effective treatment option for drug resistant epilepsy, with improving outcomes over time and few major complications. Seizure reduction rates among the three therapies were similar during the initial blinded phase. Recent long-term follow-up studies are encouraging for RNS and DBS but are lacking for VNS.

Genetic variations of adenosine kinase as predictable biomarkers of efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation in patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an alternative treatment option for individuals with refractory epilepsy, with nearly 40% of patients showing no benefit after VNS and only 6%-8% achieving seizure freedom. It is presently unclear why some patients respond to treatment and others do not. Therefore, identification of biomarkers to predict efficacy of VNS is of utmost importance. The objective of this study was to explore whether genetic variations in genes involved in adenosine kinase (ADK), ecto-5'-nucleotidase (NT5E), and adenosine A1 receptor (A1R) are linked to outcome of VNS in patients with refractory epilepsy.

METHODS

Thirty single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), including 9 in genes encoding ADK, 3 in genes encoding NT5E, and 18 in genes encoding A1R, were genotyped in 194 refractory epilepsy patients who underwent VNS. The chi-square test and binary logistic regression were used to determine associations between genetic differences and VNS efficacy.

RESULTS

A significant association between ADK SNPs rs11001109, rs7899674, and rs946185 and seizure reduction with VNS was found. Regardless of sex, age, seizure frequency and type, antiseizure drug use, etiology, and prior surgical history, all patients (10/10 patients [100%]) with minor allele homozygosity at rs11001109 (genotype AA) or rs946185 (AA) achieved > 50% seizure reduction and 4 patients (4/10 [40%]) achieved seizure freedom. VNS therapy demonstrated higher efficacy among carriers of minor allele rs7899674 (CG + GG) (68.3% vs 48.8% for patients with major allele homozygosity).

CONCLUSIONS

Homozygous ADK SNPs rs11001109 (AA) and rs946185 (AA), as well as minor allele rs7899674 (CG + GG), may serve as useful biomarkers for prediction of VNS therapy outcome.

Outcomes following surgical management of vagus nerve stimulator-related infection: a retrospective multi-institutional study

OBJECTIVE

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a rare but significant complication after vagus nerve stimulator (VNS) placement. Treatment options range from antibiotic therapy alone to hardware removal. The optimal therapeutic strategy remains open to debate. Therefore, the authors conducted this retrospective multicenter analysis to provide insight into the optimal management of VNS-related SSI (VNS-SSI).

METHODS

Under institutional review board approval and utilizing an institutional database with 641 patients who had undergone 808 VNS-related placement surgeries and 31 patients who had undergone VNS-related hardware removal surgeries, the authors retrospectively analyzed VNS-SSI.

RESULTS

Sixteen cases of VNS-SSI were identified; 12 of them had undergone the original VNS placement procedure at the authors' institutions. Thus, the incidence of VNS-SSI was calculated as 1.5%. The mean (± standard deviation) time from the most recent VNS-related surgeries to infection was 42 (± 27) days. Methicillin-sensitive staphylococcus was the usual causative bacteria (58%). Initial treatments included antibiotics with or without nonsurgical procedures (n = 6), nonremoval open surgeries for irrigation (n = 3), generator removal (n = 3), and total or near-total removal of hardware (n = 4). Although 2 patients were successfully treated with antibiotics alone or combined with generator removal, removal of both the generator and leads was eventually required in 14 patients. Mild swallowing difficulties and hoarseness occurred in 2 patients with eventual resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

Removal of the VNS including electrode leads combined with antibiotic administration is the definitive treatment but has a risk of causing dysphagia. If the surgeon finds dense scarring around the vagus nerve, the prudent approach is to snip the electrode close to the nerve as opposed to attempting to unwind the lead completely.

Factors Affecting Vagus Nerve Stimulation Outcomes in Epilepsy

Epilepsy as a common neurological disease is mostly managed effectively with antiepileptic medications. One-third of patients do not respond to medical treatments requiring alternative therapies. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been used in the last decades for the treatment of medically resistant epilepsy. Despite the extensive use of VNS in these patients, factors associated with clinical outcomes of VNS remain to be elucidated. In this study, we evaluated factors affecting VNS outcomes in epileptic patients to have a better understanding of patients who are better candidates for VNS therapy. Several databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched through June 2020 for relevant articles. The following factors were assessed in this review: previous surgical history, age at implantation and gender, types of epilepsy, duration of epilepsy, age at epilepsy onset, frequency of attacks, antiepileptic drugs, VNS parameters, EEG findings, MRI findings, and biomarkers. Literature data show that nonresponder rates range between 25% and 65%. Given the complexity and diversity of factors associated with response to VNS, more clinical studies are needed to establish better paradigm for selection of patients for VNS therapy.

Comparison of efficiency between VNS and ANT-DBS therapy in drug-resistant epilepsy: A one year follow up study

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and anterior thalamic deep brain stimulation (ANT-DBS) have both been used for treatments of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). However, there is no comparative study on the effectiveness of two methods from one single center. 17 patients with DRE who underwent VNS therapy and 18 patients who underwent DBS were enrolled. A retrospective study was performed starting from baseline before operation extending to 12 months after operation. The seizure types, duration of epilepsy, age at implantation, failed numbers of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) before operation, history of craniotomy, stimulation parameters and response rate were described. The analysis of liner regression on the age of onset, duration of epilepsy, numbers of AEDs, and the seizure reduction at 12 months after operation was applied. The mean seizure reduction in patients with DBS at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after the operation was 57.22%, 61.61%, 63.94% and 65.28%, and that in cases with VNS was 36.06%, 39.94%, 45.24% and 48.35%, respectively. At 1 year after the operation, the patients with older operation age, focal seizures and older age of onset responded better to VNS; and those older operation age, focal generalized seizures, history of craniotomy and longer duration of disease responded better to DBS. The efficiency of ANT-DBS was higher than that of VNS at each follow up time point. Patients can choose the appropriate treatment according to the individual clinical characteristics.

Altered amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations and regional homogeneity in drug-resistant epilepsy patients with vagal nerve stimulators under different current intensity

BACKGROUND

The mechanisms of vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) remain unclear. This study aimed to measure spontaneous brain activity changes caused by VNS in DRE patients using resting-state functional MRI (rs-fMRI).

METHODS

The rs-fMRI scans were performed in 16 DRE patients who underwent VNS surgery. Amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (ALFF) and regional homogeneity (ReHo) was generated and examined using paired sample t-test to compare activity changes at different current intensity stage. The preoperative and postoperative ALFF/ReHo were also compared in eight responders (≥50% reduction of seizure frequency three months after surgery) and eight nonresponders using paired sample t-test.

RESULTS

The significant ALFF and ReHo changes were shown in various cortical/subcortical structures in patients under different current intensity. After three months of stimulation, responders exhibited increased ALFF in the right middle cingulate gyrus, left parahippocampal gyrus, and left cerebellum, and increased ReHo in the right postcentral gyrus, left precuneus, left postcentral gyrus, right superior parietal gyrus, right precentral gyrus, and right superior frontal gyrus. Nonresponders exhibited decreased ALFF in the left temporal lobe and right cerebellum, increased ALFF in bilateral brainstem, decreased ReHo in bilateral lingual gyri, and increased ReHo in the right middle frontal gyrus and right anterior cingulate gyrus.

CONCLUSIONS

The spontaneous neural activity changes in DRE patients caused by VNS were in an ongoing process. Increased ALFF/ReHo in frontal cortex, cingulate gyri, precentral/postcentral gyri, parahippocampal gyri, precuneus, parietal cortex, and cerebellum may implicate in VNS-induced improvement in seizure frequency.

Efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy in children age six and younger

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study were to examine the safety and efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for reducing seizure frequency and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in children younger than six years and to examine long-term VNS efficacy for children who receive the device at ages 1-3 and at ages 4-6.

METHODS

We conducted a 10-year retrospective analysis of VNS implantations at UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh. Relevant data were collected within 12 months of VNS implantation and at six months, one, two, and four years after VNS implantation.

RESULTS

This analysis included 99 patients ages 0-3 (n = 40) and 4-6 (n = 59) at first VNS implantation. Eighty-six patients followed up for ≥4 years. There were no significant differences between age at VNS implant (0-3 vs. 4-6) and seizure etiology or most seizure semiologies. Patients took an average of 3.01 ± 1.29 AEDs prior to VNS and 3.84 ± 1.68 AEDs at their latest follow-up. The overall response to VNS therapy (≥50% seizure reduction) at one year, two years, and four years after VNS implantation was 55%, 60%, and 52%, respectively. At two years, 59% of 0- to 3-year-old patients responded to VNS and 52% of 4- to 6-year-old patients responded to VNS. The overall major complication rate was 5.6%, consistent with VNS use for older age groups.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of VNS for children with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) younger than six. One, two, and four years after VNS implantation, 55%, 60%, and 52% of these patients, respectively, achieved ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency. The safety of VNS is also comparable with older, better studied, age groups. Based on these data, VNS therapy should be considered for children younger than six.

The functional connectivity study on the brainstem-cortical/subcortical structures in responders following cervical vagus nerve stimulation

BACKGROUND

Cervical vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an effective neuromodulation therapy for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). The previous studies reported that VNS may reduce seizures by regulating the functional connectivity (FC) between cortical and subcortical regions. However, no studies on brainstem have been done in responders who achieved ≥50% seizure reduction following VNS.

METHODS

Eight healthy controls and eight patients who became responders after 3 months of operation were enrolled in this study. Resting-state functional MRI (rs-fMRI) was performed, and two sample and paired sample t test were, respectively, used to detect altered FC between brainstem and cortical/subcortical regions between controls and patients, between preoperative and postoperative patients.

RESULTS

In the control group, regions with highest FC to brainstem included bilateral anterior cingulate gyri, left basal ganglia, left insula, left cuneus, right precuneus, and bilateral cerebellum. In preoperative patients, right frontal middle gyrus, bilateral basal ganglia, and right cerebellum were showed highest FC to brainstem. Compared with the controls, preoperative patients exhibited increased FC in bilateral inferior frontal gyri, right temporal cortex, while decreased FC in left insula, left postcentral gyrus, right posterior cingulate gyrus, right precuneus, and left superior parietal gyrus. In postoperative patients, regions with increased FC to brainstem were left insula, left precuneus and left cuneus, and those with decreased FC were right inferior occipital gyrus and right cerebellum.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent seizures caused disturbances in brainstem-cortical/subcortical FC, especially in motor executive function related regions and default mode network. VNS could reorganize the altered FC between brainstem and insula, precuneus, and cerebellum in responders.

Vagus nerve stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a neuromodulatory therapeutic option for drug-resistant epilepsy. In randomised controlled trials, VNS implantation has resulted in over 50% reduction in seizure frequency in 26%-40% of patients within 1 year. Long-term uncontrolled studies suggest better responses to VNS over time; however, the assessment of other potential predictive factors has led to contradictory results. Although initially designed for managing focal seizures, its use has been extended to other forms of drug-resistant epilepsy. In this review, we discuss the evidence supporting the use of VNS, its impact on seizure frequency and quality of life, and common adverse effects of this therapy. We also include practical guidance for the approach to and the management of patients with VNS in situ.

Research progress of vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of epilepsy

The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) defined drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) that epilepsy seizure symptoms cannot be controlled with two well-tolerated and appropriately chosen antiepileptic drugs, whether they are given as monotherapy or in combination. According to the WHO reports, there is about 30%-40% of epilepsy patients belong to DRE. These patients need some treatments other than drugs, such as epilepsy surgery, and neuromodulation treatment. Traditional surgical approaches may be limited by the patient's clinical status, pathological tissue location, or overall prognosis. Thus, neuromodulation is an alternative choice to control their symptoms. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is one of the neuromodulation methods clinically, which have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In this review, we systematically describe the clinical application, clinical effects, possible antiepileptic mechanisms, and future research directions of VNS for epilepsy.

Efficienc y of vag us nerve stim ulation in epilepsy (literat ure review and case report )

Despite significant advances in epileptology, approximately one-third of patients suffer from drug-resistant epilepsy. Numerous approaches are currently available to treat epilepsy; however, there are still many patients with treatment-resistant epilepsy, in whom antiepileptic drugs are ineffective and surgical treatment is impossible. Thus, searching for new effective antiepileptic drugs and alternative treatments (such as vagus nerve stimulation) for these patients remains highly relevant. This literature review covers the indications for and the efficacy and tolerability of vagus nerve stimulation in patients with epilepsy. We also report a case of successful treatment of a patient with drug-resistant epilepsy using this method.

Vagus nerve stimulation for pediatric patients with intractable epilepsy between 3 and 6 years of age: study protocol for a double-blind, randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical observations have reported the potential benefit of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) as an adjunctive therapy for pediatric epilepsy. Preliminary evidence suggests that VNS treatment is effective for seizure reduction and mental development in young participants between 3 and 6 years of age who suffer from intractable epilepsy. However, robust clinical evidence for quantifying the difference of the efficacy and safety of VNS treatment in this specific patient population has yet to be reported.

METHODS/DESIGN

A two-armed, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, prospective trial will be carried out to evaluate whether VNS is beneficial and safe for pediatric epilepsy. Pediatric participants aged between 3 to 6 years old with intractable epilepsy will be recruited and randomly assigned to experimental and control groups with a 1:1 allocation using a computer-generating randomization schedule. Before enrollment, informed consent will be signed by the parents of the participants and the study researchers. Participants in the experimental group will receive electrical stimulation over 24 weeks under standard stimulation parameters. Participants in the control group will not receive any stimulation during the 12 weeks of the double-blind period. The guardians of the participants are required to keep a detailed diary to record seizure activity. Outcome assessments including seizure frequency, Gesell Mental Developmental Scale scores, use of antiepileptic drugs and dosages, and adverse events will be collected at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and/or 24 weeks after electrical stimulation is initiated. The effects of treatment will be analyzed with time and treatment group comparisons.

DISCUSSION

This trial will evaluate quantitative differences in efficacy and safety with/without VNS treatment for pediatric participants aged between 3 to 6 years with intractable epilepsy and will explore whether the current age range of VNS therapy can be expanded.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03062514 , Registered on 23 February 2017.

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) therapy update

Epilepsy affects millions of people worldwide. Approximately one-third have pharmacoresistant epilepsy, and of these, the majority are not candidates for epilepsy surgery. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) therapy has been an option to treat pharmacoresistant seizures for 30 years. In this update, we will review the clinical data that support the device's efficacy in children, adolescents, and adults. We will also review its side-effect profile, quality of life and cost benefits, and the impact the device has on sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). We will then discuss candidate selection and provide guidance on dosing and future models. Vagus nerve stimulation therapy is an effective treatment for many seizure types and epilepsy syndromes with a predictable and benign side-effect profile that supports its role as the most commonly prescribed device to treat pharmacoresistant epilepsy. "This article is part of the Supplement issue Neurostimulation for Epilepsy."