Electrical stimulation of the centromedian thalamic nucleus in control of seizures: long-term studies

Advancing thalamic neuromodulation in epilepsy: Bridging adult data to pediatric care

Thalamic neuromodulation has emerged as a treatment option for drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) with widespread and/or undefined epileptogenic networks. While deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) depth electrodes offer means for electrical stimulation of the thalamus in adult patients with DRE, the application of thalamic neuromodulation in pediatric epilepsy remains limited. To address this gap, the Neuromodulation Expert Collaborative was established within the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium (PERC) Epilepsy Surgery Special Interest Group. In this expert review, existing evidence and recommendations for thalamic neuromodulation modalities using DBS and RNS are summarized, with a focus on the anterior (ANT), centromedian(CMN), and pulvinar nuclei of the thalamus. To-date, only DBS of the ANT is FDA approved for treatment of DRE in adult patients based on the results of the pivotal SANTE (Stimulation of the Anterior Nucleus of Thalamus for Epilepsy) study. Evidence for other thalamic neurmodulation indications and targets is less abundant. Despite the lack of evidence, positive responses to thalamic stimulation in adults with DRE have led to its off-label use in pediatric patients. Although caution is warranted due to differences between pediatric and adult epilepsy, the efficacy and safety of pediatric neuromodulation appear comparable to that in adults. Indeed, CMN stimulation is increasingly accepted for generalized and diffuse onset epilepsies, with recent completion of one randomized trial. There is also growing interest in using pulvinar stimulation for temporal plus and posterior quadrant epilepsies with one ongoing clinical trial in Europe. The future of thalamic neuromodulation holds promise for revolutionizing the treatment landscape of childhood epilepsy. Ongoing research, technological advancements, and collaborative efforts are poised to refine and improve thalamic neuromodulation strategies, ultimately enhancing the quality of life for children with DRE.

The 100 Most Cited Articles on Functional Neurosurgery in Latin America: A Scientometric Analysis

Significant progress has been made in Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery (SFN) within Latin America (LATAM), which can be attributed to the rapid advancements in technology and a growing pool of expertise. However, despite the growing importance of this field, a comprehensive scientometric analysis of LATAM contributions is still lacking. The aim of this study is to shed light on the top-cited articles in the field authored by LATAM researchers. A search of the Scopus database was performed using specific keywords in the field of SFN to retrieve the top 100 most cited articles. Only those with LATAM affiliation for the first or corresponding position were included. The 100 top-cited articles were published between 1978 and 2019 across 47 different journals. On average, these articles had a citation count of 97.2 citations. A total of 635 LATAM authors were identified, including 145 women. Notably, the 5 most productive and impactful authors were Velasco F., Velasco M., Velasco A.L., Cukiert A., and Jiménez F. Within the field of SFN, epilepsy accounted for 47% of the documents, while the remaining 53% encompassed research on psychiatric diseases, movement disorders, translational research, pain, and electrical mapping. Epilepsia emerged as the journal with the highest number of articles. Mexico and Brazil contributed the most articles, with the University of São Paulo and the Hospital General de Mexico being the most productive institutions. This scientometric analysis highlights the impactful research contributions from the region, identifies influential authors and institutions, and emphasizes the necessity for additional collaboration and exploration.

Combined Neuromodulation (Vagus Nerve Stimulation and Deep Brain Stimulation) in Patients With Refractory Generalized Epilepsy: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

This article describes our findings while treating patients with refractory generalized epilepsy with combined vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and centro-median deep brain stimulation (CMDBS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 11 consecutive patients with refractory generalized epilepsy (ten with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome) previously submitted to VNS and who subsequently underwent CMDBS were retrospectively studied. The VNS final parameters were 2 to 2.5 mA, 30 Hz, and 500 μs, cycling mode, 30 seconds "on" and 5 minutes "off" for all patients. The CMDBS final parameters were 4 to 5 V, 130 Hz, and 300 μs, bipolar, continuous stimulation in all patients.

RESULTS

There were eight male participants, ranging in age from eight to 49 years (mean 19 years). Follow-up time after VNS ranged from 18 to 132 months (mean 52 months) and from an additional 18 to 164 months (mean 42 months) during combined VNS-CMDBS. All patients had daily seizures. Atypical absences were noted in eight patients, tonic seizures in seven, bilateral tonic-clonic seizures in four, atonic seizures in three, and myoclonic seizures in two patients. Four patients were initially considered responders to VNS. All these patients also had an additional >50% seizure frequency reduction during combined VNS-CMDBS. Seven patients were not responders to VNS, and of those, four had an additional >50% seizure frequency reduction during combined VNS-CMDBS. Eight patients had an additional >50% reduction in seizure frequency when moved from VNS alone to VNS-CMDBS therapy. There were two nonresponders during combined VNS-CMDBS therapy, and both were nonresponders to VNS alone. Nine patients were considered responders during VNS-CMDBS combined therapy compared with baseline.

DISCUSSION

This study showed that combined VNS-CMDBS therapy was able to double the number of responders compared with VNS alone in a cohort of patients with refractory generalized epilepsy. We believe these data represent the first evidence that combined neuromodulation may be useful in this quite homogeneous patient population.

A multicenter retrospective study of patients treated in the thalamus with responsive neurostimulation

Introduction

For drug resistant epilepsy patients who are either not candidates for resective surgery or have already failed resective surgery, neuromodulation is a promising option. Neuromodulatory approaches include responsive neurostimulation (RNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and vagal nerve stimulation (VNS). Thalamocortical circuits are involved in both generalized and focal onset seizures. This paper explores the use of RNS in the centromedian nucleus of the thalamus (CMN) and in the anterior thalamic nucleus (ANT) of patients with drug resistant epilepsy.

Methods

This is a retrospective multicenter study from seven different epilepsy centers in the United States. Patients that had unilateral or bilateral thalamic RNS leads implanted in the CMN or ANT for at least 6 months were included. Primary objectives were to describe the implant location and determine changes in the frequency of disabling seizures at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and > 2 years. Secondary objectives included documenting seizure free periods, anti-seizure medication regimen changes, stimulation side effects, and serious adverse events. In addition, the global clinical impression scale was completed.

Results

Twelve patients had at least one lead placed in the CMN, and 13 had at least one lead placed in the ANT. The median baseline seizure frequency was 15 per month. Overall, the median seizure reduction was 33% at 6 months, 55% at 1 year, 65% at 2 years, and 74% at >2 years. Seizure free intervals of at least 3 months occurred in nine patients. Most patients (60%, 15/25) did not have a change in anti-seizure medications post RNS placement. Two serious adverse events were recorded, one related to RNS implantation. Lastly, overall functioning seemed to improve with 88% showing improvement on the global clinical impression scale.

Discussion

Meaningful seizure reduction was observed in patients who suffer from drug resistant epilepsy with unilateral or bilateral RNS in either the ANT or CMN of the thalamus. Most patients remained on their pre-operative anti-seizure medication regimen. The device was well tolerated with few side effects. There were rare serious adverse events. Most patients showed an improvement in global clinical impression scores.

A review of neurophysiological effects and efficiency of waveform parameters in deep brain stimulation

Neurostimulation has diverse clinical applications and potential as a treatment for medically refractory movement disorders, epilepsy, and other neurological disorders. However, the parameters used to program electrodes-polarity, pulse width, amplitude, and frequency-and how they are adjusted have remained largely untouched since the 1970 s. This review summarizes the state-of-the-art in Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) and highlights the need for further research to uncover the physiological mechanisms of neurostimulation. We focus on studies that reveal the potential for clinicians to use waveform parameters to selectively stimulate neural tissue for therapeutic benefit, while avoiding activating tissue associated with adverse effects. DBS uses cathodic monophasic rectangular pulses with passive recharging in clinical practice to treat neurological conditions such as Parkinson's Disease. However, research has shown that stimulation efficiency can be improved, and side effects reduced, through modulating parameters and adding novel waveform properties. These developments can prolong implantable pulse generator lifespan, reducing costs and surgery-associated risks. Waveform parameters can stimulate neurons based on axon orientation and intrinsic structural properties, providing clinicians with more precise targeting of neural pathways. These findings could expand the spectrum of diseases treatable with neuromodulation and improve patient outcomes.

Deep brain stimulation for patients with refractory epilepsy: nuclei selection and surgical outcome

Objective

By studying the surgical outcome of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of different target nuclei for patients with refractory epilepsy, we aimed to explore a clinically feasible target nucleus selection strategy.

Methods

We selected patients with refractory epilepsy who were not eligible for resective surgery. For each patient, we performed DBS on a thalamic nucleus [anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT), subthalamic nucleus (STN), centromedian nucleus (CMN), or pulvinar nucleus (PN)] selected based on the location of the patient's epileptogenic zone (EZ) and the possible epileptic network involved. We monitored the clinical outcomes for at least 12 months and analyzed the clinical characteristics and seizure frequency changes to assess the postoperative efficacy of DBS on the different target nuclei.

Results

Out of the 65 included patients, 46 (70.8%) responded to DBS. Among the 65 patients, 45 underwent ANT-DBS, 29 (64.4%) responded to the treatment, and four (8.9%) of them reported being seizure-free for at least 1 year. Among the patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE, n = 36) and extratemporal lobe epilepsy (ETLE, n = 9), 22 (61.1%) and 7 (77.8%) responded to the treatment, respectively. Among the 45 patients who underwent ANT-DBS, 28 (62%) had focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS). Of these 28 patients, 18 (64%) responded to the treatment. Out of the 65 included patients, 16 had EZ related to the sensorimotor cortex and underwent STN-DBS. Among them, 13 (81.3%) responded to the treatment, and two (12.5%) were seizure-free for at least 6 months. Three patients had Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS)-like epilepsy and underwent CMN-DBS; all of them responded to the treatment (seizure frequency reductions: 51.6%, 79.6%, and 79.5%). Finally, one patient with bilateral occipital lobe epilepsy underwent PN-DBS, reducing the seizure frequency by 69.7%.

Significance

ANT-DBS is effective for patients with TLE or ETLE. In addition, ANT-DBS is effective for patients with FBTCS. STN-DBS might be an optimal treatment for patients with motor seizures, especially when the EZ overlaps the sensorimotor cortex. CMN and PN may be considered modulating targets for patients with LGS-like epilepsy or occipital lobe epilepsy, respectively.

Deep brain stimulation of thalamus for epilepsy

Neuromodulation (neurostimulation) is a relatively new and rapidly growing treatment for refractory epilepsy. Three varieties are approved in the US: vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS). This article reviews thalamic DBS for epilepsy. Among many thalamic sub-nuclei, DBS for epilepsy has been targeted to the anterior nucleus (ANT), centromedian nucleus (CM), dorsomedial nucleus (DM) and pulvinar (PULV). Only ANT is FDA-approved, based upon a controlled clinical trial. Bilateral stimulation of ANT reduced seizures by 40.5% at three months in the controlled phase (p = .038) and 75% by 5 years in the uncontrolled phase. Side effects related to paresthesias, acute hemorrhage, infection, occasional increased seizures, and usually transient effects on mood and memory. Efficacy was best documented for focal onset seizures in temporal or frontal lobe. CM stimulation may be useful for generalized or multifocal seizures and PULV for posterior limbic seizures. Mechanisms of DBS for epilepsy are largely unknown, but animal work points to changes in receptors, channels, neurotransmitters, synapses, network connectivity and neurogenesis. Personalization of therapies, in terms of connectivity of the seizure onset zone to the thalamic sub- nucleus and individual characteristics of the seizures, might lead to improved efficacy. Many questions remain about DBS, including the best candidates for different types of neuromodulation, the best targets, the best stimulation parameters, how to minimize side effects and how to deliver current noninvasively. Despite the questions, neuromodulation provides useful new opportunities to treat people with refractory seizures not responding to medicines and not amenable to resective surgery.

Frameless Robot-Assisted Asleep Centromedian Thalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery in Patients with Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Technical Description and Short-Term Clinical Results

INTRODUCTION

This purpose of this work is to give a detailed description of a surgical technique for frameless robot-assisted asleep deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the centromedian thalamic nucleus (CMT) in drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE).

METHODS

Ten consecutively enrolled patients who underwent CMT-DBS were included in the study. The FreeSurfer "Thalamic Kernel Segmentation" module and experience target coordinates were used for locating the CMT, and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) images were used to check the target. The patient's head was secured with a head clip, and electrode implantation was performed with the assistance of the neurosurgical robot Sinovation^®. After opening the dura, the burr hole was continuously flushed with physiological saline to stop air from entering the skull. All procedures were performed under general anesthesia without intraoperative microelectrode recording (MER).

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients at surgery and onset of seizures was 22 years (range 11-41 years) and 11 years (range 1-21 years), respectively. The median duration of seizures before CMT-DBS surgery was 10 years (2-26 years). CMT was successfully segmented, and its position was verified by experience target coordinates and QSM images in all ten patients. The mean surgical time for bilateral CMT-DBS in this cohort was 165 ± 18 min. The mean pneumocephalus volume was 2 cm³. The median absolute errors in the x-, y-, and z-axes were 0.7 mm, 0.5 mm, and 0.9 mm, respectively. The median Euclidean distance (ED) and radial error (RE) was 1.3 ± 0.5 mm and 1.0 ± 0.3 mm, respectively. No significant difference was found between right- and left-sided electrodes regarding the RE nor the ED. After a mean 12-month follow-up, the average reduction in seizures was 61%, and six patients experienced a ≥ 50% reduction in seizures, including one patient who had no seizures after the operation. All patients tolerated the anesthesia operation, and no permanent or serious complications were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Frameless robot-assisted asleep surgery is a precise and safe approach for placing CMT electrodes in patients with DRE, shortening the surgery time. The segmentation of the thalamic nuclei enables the precise location of the CMT, and the flow of physiological saline to seal the burr holes is a good way to reduce the influx of air. CMT-DBS is an effective method to reduce seizures.

Thalamic neuromodulation in epilepsy: A primer for emerging circuit-based therapies

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is a common, often debilitating disease of hyperexcitable neural networks. While medically intractable cases may benefit from surgery, there may be no single, well-localized focus for resection or ablation. In such cases, approaching the disease from a network-based perspective may be beneficial.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, the authors provide a narrative review of normal thalamic anatomy and physiology and propose general strategies for preventing and/or aborting seizures by modulating this structure. Additionally, they make specific recommendations for targeting the thalamus within different contexts, motivated by a more detailed discussion of its distinct nuclei and their respective connectivity. By describing important principles governing thalamic function and its involvement in seizure networks, the authors aim to provide a primer for those now entering this fast-growing field of thalamic neuromodulation for epilepsy.

EXPERT OPINION

The thalamus is critically involved with the function of many cortical and subcortical areas, suggesting it may serve as a compelling node for preventing or aborting seizures, and so it has increasingly been targeted for the surgical treatment of epilepsy. As various thalamic neuromodulation strategies for seizure control are developed, there is a need to ground such interventions in a mechanistic, circuit-based framework.

Neuromodulation in Children with Drug-Resistant Epilepsy

The introduction of neuromodulation was a revolutionary advancement in the antiseizure armamentarium for refractory epilepsy. The basic principle of neuromodulation is to deliver an electrical stimulation to the desired neuronal site to modify the neuronal functions not only at the site of delivery but also at distant sites by complex neuronal processes like disrupting the neuronal circuitry and amplifying the functions of marginally functional neurons. The modality is considered open-loop when electrical stimulation is provided at a set time interval or closed-loop when delivered in response to an incipient seizure. Neuromodulation in individuals older than 18 years with epilepsy has proven efficacious and safe. The use of neuromodulation is extended off-label to pediatric patients with epilepsy and the results are promising. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are Food and Drug Administration-approved therapeutic techniques. The VNS provides retrograde signaling to the central nervous system, whereas DBS and RNS are more target specific in the central nervous system. While DBS is open-loop and approved for stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus, the RNS is closed-loop and can stimulate any cortical or subcortical structure. We will review different modalities and their clinical efficacy in individuals with epilepsy, with a focus on pediatric patients.

Towards network-guided neuromodulation for epilepsy

Epilepsy is well-recognized as a disorder of brain networks. There is a growing body of research to identify critical nodes within dynamic epileptic networks with the aim to target therapies that halt the onset and propagation of seizures. In parallel, intracranial neuromodulation, including deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation, are well-established and expanding as therapies to reduce seizures in adults with focal-onset epilepsy; and there is emerging evidence for their efficacy in children and generalized-onset seizure disorders. The convergence of these advancing fields is driving an era of 'network-guided neuromodulation' for epilepsy. In this review, we distil the current literature on network mechanisms underlying neurostimulation for epilepsy. We discuss the modulation of key 'propagation points' in the epileptogenic network, focusing primarily on thalamic nuclei targeted in current clinical practice. These include (i) the anterior nucleus of thalamus, now a clinically approved and targeted site for open loop stimulation, and increasingly targeted for responsive neurostimulation; and (ii) the centromedian nucleus of the thalamus, a target for both deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation in generalized-onset epilepsies. We discuss briefly the networks associated with other emerging neuromodulation targets, such as the pulvinar of the thalamus, piriform cortex, septal area, subthalamic nucleus, cerebellum and others. We report synergistic findings garnered from multiple modalities of investigation that have revealed structural and functional networks associated with these propagation points - including scalp and invasive EEG, and diffusion and functional MRI. We also report on intracranial recordings from implanted devices which provide us data on the dynamic networks we are aiming to modulate. Finally, we review the continuing evolution of network-guided neuromodulation for epilepsy to accelerate progress towards two translational goals: (i) to use pre-surgical network analyses to determine patient candidacy for neurostimulation for epilepsy by providing network biomarkers that predict efficacy; and (ii) to deliver precise, personalized and effective antiepileptic stimulation to prevent and arrest seizure propagation through mapping and modulation of each patients' individual epileptogenic networks.

Practical considerations in epilepsy neurostimulation

Neuromodulation is a key therapeutic tool for clinicians managing patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Multiple devices are available with long-term follow-up and real-world experience. The aim of this review is to give a practical summary of available neuromodulation techniques to guide the selection of modalities, focusing on patient selection for devices, common approaches and techniques for initiation of programming, and outpatient management issues. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (DBS-ANT), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) are all supported by randomized controlled trials that show safety and a significant impact on seizure reduction, as well as a suggestion of reduction in the risk of sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP). Significant seizure reductions are observed after 3 months for DBS, RNS, and VNS in randomized controlled trials, and efficacy appears to improve with time out to 7 to 10 years of follow-up for all modalities, albeit in uncontrolled follow-up or retrospective studies. A significant number of patients experience seizure-free intervals of 6 months or more with all three modalities. Number and location of epileptogenic foci are important factors affecting efficacy, and together with comorbidities such as severe mood or sleep disorders, may influence the choice of modality. Programming has evolved-DBS is typically initiated at lower current/voltage than used in the pivotal trial, whereas target charge density is lower with RNS, however generalizable optimal parameters are yet to be defined. Noninvasive brain stimulation is an emerging stimulation modality, although it is currently not used widely. In summary, clinical practice has evolved from those established in pivotal trials. Guidance is now available for clinicians who wish to expand their approach, and choice of neuromodulation technique may be tailored to individual patients based on their epilepsy characteristics, risk tolerance, and preferences.

Centromedian thalamic neuromodulation for the treatment of idiopathic generalized epilepsy

Idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) is a common type of epilepsy and despite an increase in the number of available anti-seizure medications, approximately 20–30% of people with IGE continue to experience seizures despite adequate medication trials. Unlike focal epilepsy, resective surgery is not a viable treatment option for IGE; however, neuromodulation may be an effective surgical treatment for people with IGE. Thalamic stimulation through deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) have been explored for the treatment of generalized and focal epilepsies. Although the data regarding DBS and RNS in IGE is limited to case reports and case series, the results of the published studies have been promising. The current manuscript will review the published literature of DBS and RNS within the centromedian nucleus of the thalamus for the treatment of IGE, as well as highlight an illustrative case.

Bibliometric Analysis of Mexican Publications on Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery From 1949 to 2021

Background

Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery (SFN) is a rapidly evolving field and some emerging countries, especially Mexico, have made significant contributions to this discipline. A bibliometric analysis has never been performed in Latin America, and this would be particularly important to show the areas that remain poorly studied, and design research strategies for the future.

Methods

Scopus was queried using keywords pertaining to functional neurosurgery, restricting the affiliation country to Mexico, and considering documents published after 1949. Added to the initial search, a complementary literature exploration by author, considering the publications of the most productive neurosurgeons, was performed. A descriptive statistical analysis was carried out.

Results

From 5,109 articles, only 371 were eligible. Scientific production has gradually increased with time. Epilepsy (31%) and movement disorders (27.4%) were the most studied neurological conditions, whereas the other 41.6% corresponded to pain, behavior disorders, spinal cord injuries, neuromodulation, stereotactic biopsies, and SFN history. Level of evidence was predominantly level V (59.1%). Publication output is highly skewed to Mexico City, which represents 78.4% of national production. Relative to factors associated with impact of research, publications in English had more citations (28.5 mean citations per paper), and journals with an impact factor greater than one had more than 10 mean citations per paper.

Conclusions

Mexico has experienced an increase in the productivity of SFN literature, addressing the most prevalent issues in the country (epilepsy and motor disorders). However, it is necessary to report studies with a higher level of evidence, as well as to decentralize the research collaborating with national institutions outside Mexico City. On the other hand, it is imperative to promote scientific production in English and in high-impact indexed journals to increase the visibility of our production. We would like to call upon our colleagues in other countries to reproduce our methodology, in order to determine the factors associated with the impact and productivity on SFN research.

Novel targets in deep brain stimulation for movement disorders

The neurosurgical treatment of movement disorders, primarily via deep brain stimulation (DBS), is a rapidly expanding and evolving field. Although conventional targets including the subthalamic nucleus (STN) and internal segment of the globus pallidus (GPi) for Parkinson's disease and ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalams (VIM) for tremor provide substantial benefit in terms of both motor symptoms and quality of life, other targets for DBS have been explored in an effort to maximize clinical benefit and also avoid undesired adverse effects associated with stimulation. These novel targets primarily include the rostral zona incerta (rZI), caudal zona incerta (cZI)/posterior subthalamic area (PSA), prelemniscal radiation (Raprl), pedunculopontine nucleus (PPN), substantia nigra pars reticulata (SNr), centromedian/parafascicular (CM/PF) nucleus of the thalamus, nucleus basalis of Meynert (NBM), dentato-rubro-thalamic tract (DRTT), dentate nucleus of the cerebellum, external segment of the globus pallidus (GPe), and ventral oralis (VO) complex of the thalamus. However, reports of outcomes utilizing these targets are scattered and disparate. In order to provide a comprehensive resource for researchers and clinicians alike, we have summarized the existing literature surrounding these novel targets, including rationale for their use, neurosurgical techniques where relevant, outcomes and adverse effects of stimulation, and future directions for research.

Responsive neurostimulation of the thalamus improves seizure control in idiopathic generalised epilepsy: initial case series

OBJECTIVES

Up to 40% of patients with idiopathic generalised epilepsy (IGE) are drug resistant and potentially could benefit from intracranial neuromodulation of the seizure circuit. We present outcomes following 2 years of thalamic-responsive neurostimulation for IGE.

METHODS

Four patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy underwent RNS System implantation in the bilateral centromedian (CM) nucleus region. Electrophysiological data were extracted from the clinical patient data management system and analysed using a specialised platform (BRAINStim). Postoperative visualisation of electrode locations was performed using Lead-DBS. Seizure outcomes were reported using the Engel scale.

RESULTS

Patients experienced a 75%-99% reduction in seizure frequency with decreased seizure duration and severity (Engel class IB, IC, IIA and IIIA), as well as significant improvements in quality of life. Outcomes were durable through at least 2 years of therapy. Detection accuracy for all patients overall decreased over successive programming epochs from a mean of 96.5% to 88.3%. Most electrodes used to deliver stimulation were located in the CM (7/10) followed by the posterior dorsal ventral lateral (2/2), posterior ventral posterior lateral (3/4) and posterior ventral ventral lateral (2/3). In all patients, stimulation varied from 0.2 to 2.0 mA and amplitude only increased over successive epochs. The raw percentage of intracranial electroencephalography recordings with stimulations delivered to electrographic seizures was 24.8%, 1.2%, 7.6% and 8.8%.

CONCLUSION

Closed-loop stimulation of the CM region may provide significant improvement in seizure control and quality of life for patients with drug-resistant IGE. Optimal detection and stimulation locations and parameters remain an active area of investigation for accelerating and fine-tuning clinical responses.

Centromedian thalamic deep brain stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy: single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

Neuromodulation of the centromedian nucleus of the thalamus (CM) has unclear effectiveness in the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy. Prior reports suggest that it may be more effective in the generalized epilepsies such as Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS). The objective of this study was to determine the outcome of CM deep brain stimulation (DBS) at the authors' institution.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed for all patients who underwent CM DBS at Emory University, which occurred between December 2018 and May 2021. CM DBS electrodes were implanted using three different surgical methods, including frame-based, robot-assisted, and direct MRI-guided. Seizure frequency, stimulation parameters, and adverse events were recorded from subsequent clinical follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients underwent CM DBS: 9 had symptomatic generalized epilepsy (including 5 with LGS), 3 had primary or idiopathic generalized epilepsy, and 2 had bifrontal focal epilepsy. At last follow-up (mean [± SEM] 19 ± 5 months, range 4.1-33 months, ≥ 6 months in 11 patients), the median seizure frequency reduction was 91%. Twelve patients (86%) were considered responders (≥ 50% decrease in seizure frequency), including 10 of 12 with generalized epilepsy and both patients with bifrontal epilepsy. Surgical adverse events were rare and included 1 patient with hardware breakage, 1 with a postoperative aspiration event, and 1 with a nonclinically significant intracranial hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

CM DBS was an effective treatment for drug-resistant generalized and bifrontal epilepsies. Additional studies and analyses may investigate whether CM DBS is best suited for specific epilepsy types, and the relationship of lead location to outcome in different epilepsies.

Closed-Loop Brain Stimulation and Paradigm Shifts in Epilepsy Surgery

Advances in device technology have created greater flexibility in treating seizures as emergent properties of networks that exist on a local to global continuum. All patients with drug-resistant epilepsy are potential surgical candidates, given that intracranial neuromodulation through deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation can reduce seizures and improve quality of life, even in multifocal and generalized epilepsies. To achieve this goal, indications and strategies for diagnostic epilepsy surgery are evolving. This article describes the state-of-the-art in epilepsy surgery and related changes in how we define indications for diagnostic and therapeutic surgical intervention.

DBS of Thalamic Centromedian Nucleus for Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (ESTEL Trial)

OBJECTIVE

Prior uncontrolled studies have reported seizure reductions following deep brain stimulation (DBS) in patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), but evidence from randomized controlled studies is lacking. We aimed to formally assess the efficacy and safety of DBS to the centromedian thalamic nucleus (CM) for the treatment of LGS.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, double-blind, randomized study of continuous, cycling stimulation of CM-DBS, in patients with LGS. Following pre- and post-implantation periods, half received 3 months of stimulation (blinded phase), then all received 3 months of stimulation (unblinded phase). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with ≥50% reduction in diary-recorded seizures in stimulated versus control participants, measured at the end of the blinded phase. A secondary outcome was the proportion of participants with a ≥50% reduction in electrographic seizures on 24-hour ambulatory electroencephalography (EEG) at the end of the blinded phase.

RESULTS

Between November 2017 and December 2019, 20 young adults with LGS (17-37 years;13 women) underwent bilateral CM-DBS at a single center in Australia, with 19 randomized (treatment, n = 10 and control, n = 9). Fifty percent of the stimulation group achieved ≥50% seizure reduction, compared with 22% of controls (odds ratio [OR] = 3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.44-21.45, p = 0.25). For electrographic seizures, 59% of the stimulation group had ≥50% reduction at the end of the blinded phase, compared with none of the controls (OR= 23.25, 95% CI = 1.0-538.4, p = 0.05). Across all patients, median seizure reduction (baseline vs study exit) was 46.7% (interquartile range [IQR] = 28-67%) for diary-recorded seizures and 53.8% (IQR = 27-73%) for electrographic seizures.

INTERPRETATION

CM-DBS in patients with LGS reduced electrographic rather than diary-recorded seizures, after 3 months of stimulation. Fifty percent of all participants had diary-recorded seizures reduced by half at the study exit, providing supporting evidence of the treatment effect. ANN NEUROL 2021.

Neuromodulation in Drug Resistant Epilepsy

Epilepsy affects approximately 70 million people worldwide, and it is a significant contributor to the global burden of neurological disorders. Despite the advent of new AEDs, drug resistant-epilepsy continues to affect 30-40% of PWE. Once identified as having drug-resistant epilepsy, these patients should be referred to a comprehensive epilepsy center for evaluation to establish if they are candidates for potential curative surgeries. Unfortunately, a large proportion of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy are poor surgical candidates due to a seizure focus located in eloquent cortex, multifocal epilepsy or inability to identify the zone of ictal onset. An alternative treatment modality for these patients is neuromodulation. Here we present the evidence, indications and safety considerations for the neuromodulation therapies in vagal nerve stimulation (VNS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), or deep brain stimulation (DBS).

Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment of Refractory Epilepsy

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been used in the treatment of motor diseases with remarkable safety and efficacy, which abet the interest of its application in the management of other neurologic and psychiatric disorders such as epilepsy. Experimental data demonstrated that electric current could modulate distinct brain circuits and decrease the neuronal hypersynchronization seen in epileptic activity. The ability to carefully choose the most suitable anatomical target as well as to define the most reasonable stimulation parameters is highly dependable on the comprehension of the underlying mechanisms of action, which remain unclear. This review aimed to explore the relevant clinical data regarding the use of DBS in the treatment of refractory epilepsy.

Quantitative EEG biomarkers for epilepsy and their relation to chemical biomarkers

The electroencephalogram (EEG) is the most important method to diagnose epilepsy. In clinical settings, it is evaluated by experts who identify patterns visually. Quantitative EEG is the application of digital signal processing to clinical recordings in order to automatize diagnostic procedures, and to make patterns visible that are hidden to the human eye. The EEG is related to chemical biomarkers, as electrical activity is based on chemical signals. The most well-known chemical biomarkers are blood laboratory tests to identify seizures after they have happened. However, research on chemical biomarkers is much less extensive than research on quantitative EEG, and combined studies are rarely published, but highly warranted. Quantitative EEG is as old as the EEG itself, but still, the methods are not yet standard in clinical practice. The most evident application is an automation of manual work, but also a quantitative description and localization of interictal epileptiform events as well as seizures can reveal important hints for diagnosis and contribute to presurgical evaluation. In addition, the assessment of network characteristics and entropy measures were found to reveal important insights into epileptic brain activity. Application scenarios of quantitative EEG in epilepsy include seizure prediction, pharmaco-EEG, treatment monitoring, evaluation of cognition, and neurofeedback. The main challenges to quantitative EEG are poor reliability and poor generalizability of measures, as well as the need for individualization of procedures. A main hindrance for quantitative EEG to enter clinical routine is also that training is not yet part of standard curricula for clinical neurophysiologists.

Seizure outcome during bilateral, continuous, thalamic centromedian nuclei deep brain stimulation in patients with generalized epilepsy: a prospective, open-label study

OBJECTIVE

We report on the seizure frequency and attention outcome during thalamic centromedian stimulation (CM-DBS) in patients with refractory generalized epilepsy (GE).

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients with GE who were submitted to CM-DBS and had at least one year of follow-up were prospectively studied. The CM was targeted bilaterally. Stimulation intensity was ramped up (bipolar, continuous, 130 Hz; 300μsec) until 4.5 V or until side effects developed. Contacts` position was determined on postoperative volumetric MRI scans. Attention was qualitatively evaluated using the SNAP-IV (Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham) questionnaire. Patients were considered responders during CM-DBS if an at least 50% seizure frequency reduction was obtained compared to baseline.

RESULTS

Median age was 15.5 years (13 males). Median follow-up time was 2.55 years. EEG disclosed generalized spike-and wave discharges in all patients. MRI was normal in 10 patients, showed diffuse atrophy in 6 patients, and showed abnormalities in 4 patients (3 patients had bilateral cortical development abnormalities and one had unilateral hemispheric atrophy). Patients presented with daily multiple seizure types (8 to 66 per day; median: 37), including tonic, atonic, myoclonic, atypical absence and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Mean DBS intensity was 4.3 V. An insertional effect was noted in 14 patients. CM-DBS was able to significantly reduce the frequency of tonic (p < 0.001), atypical absence seizures (p < 0.001), atonic seizures (p = 0.001) and bilateral generalized tonic-clonic seizures (p = 0.004). One patient became seizure-free. Ninety percent of the patients were considered responders (>50% seizure frequency reduction). All patients showed some improvement in attention. The mean number of items in which improvement was noted in the SNAP-IV questionnaire was 4.8. There was a significant relationship between overall seizure frequency reduction and improvement of attention (p = 0.033).

DISCUSSION

This prospective, open label study included a large, homogeneous cohort and provided evidence on the efficacy of CM-DBS in reducing the seizure burden and increasing attention in patients with refractory generalized epilepsy.

Comparison and Selection of Current Implantable Anti-Epileptic Devices

Implantable neural stimulators represent an advanced treatment adjunct to medication for pharmacoresistant epilepsy and alternative for patients that are not good candidates for resective surgery. Three treatment modalities are currently FDA-approved: vagus nerve stimulation, responsive neurostimulation, and deep brain stimulation. These devices were originally trialed in very similar patient populations with focal epilepsy, but head-to-head comparison trials have not been performed. As such, device selection may be challenging due to large overlaps in clinical indications and efficacy. Here we will review the data reported in the original pivotal clinical trials as well as long-term experience with these technologies. We will highlight differences in their features and mechanisms of action which may help optimize device selection on a case-by-case basis.

Deep brain stimulation for epilepsy

The efficacy and safety of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) for epilepsy (SANTE) trial was demonstrated by a randomized trial by Fisher et al. (2010). Based on this trial, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently granted approval for DBS therapy for epilepsy; the indication is as follows: "Bilateral stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) for epilepsy is indicated as an adjunctive therapy for reducing the frequency of seizures in individuals 18 years of age or older diagnosed with epilepsy characterized by partial onset seizures with or without secondary generalization that are refractory to three or more antiepileptic medications". This paper reviews the experimental data and the clinical experience using DBS for the treatment of epilepsy. "This article is part of the Supplement issue Neurostimulation for Epilepsy."

Deep brain stimulation for seizure control in drug-resistant epilepsy

Antiepileptic drugs prevent morbidity and death in a large number of patients suffering from epilepsy. However, it is estimated that approximately 30% of epileptic patients will not have adequate seizure control with medication alone. Resection of epileptogenic cortex may be indicated in medically refractory cases with a discrete seizure focus in noneloquent cortex. For patients in whom resection is not an option, deep brain stimulation (DBS) may be an effective means of seizure control. Deep brain stimulation targets for treating seizures primarily include the thalamic nuclei, hippocampus, subthalamic nucleus, and cerebellum. A variety of stimulation parameters have been studied, and more recent advances in electrical stimulation to treat epilepsy include responsive neurostimulation. Data suggest that DBS is effective for treating drug-resistant epilepsy.

Technical Implications in Revision Surgery for Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) of the Thalamus for Refractory Epilepsy

Background and Purpose

Implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes in the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) or the centromedian nucleus (CM), for the treatment of refractory epilepsy, is technically demanding. To enhance the accuracy of electrode placement within the ANT and CM, we analyzed our experience with electrode revision surgery in ANT and CM DBS and investigated the cause of misplacement and verifying methods for accurate placement.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the medical records of 23 patients who underwent DBS for refractory epilepsy during the period from 2013 to 2016 was performed.

Results

Misplacement of the electrode occurred in 1 (25%) of 4 ANT DBS and 2 (14.3%) of 14 patients with CM DBS performed in our institute, and revision surgery was performed in three patients. During this period, we performed three revision surgeries for misplaced electrodes in ANT DBS that were performed at another hospital. Therefore, we performed six revision surgeries (four in ANT, two in CM) for mistargeted DBS electrodes for thalamic DBS. Transventricular lead placement and an anatomical targeting of the ANT was the cause of misplacement in the ANT and intraoperative brain shift was found to be the cause in the CM. For verification of the location of lead placement, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was superior to computed tomography and electroencephalography (EEG).

Conclusions

To reduce the rate of electrode misplacement for refractory epilepsy, image-based targeting of the ANT according to individual anatomical variation, and efforts to minimize intraoperative brain shift are essential. To verify the location of the electrode, MRI examination is mandatory in DBS for refractory epilepsy.

Epilepsy and Neuromodulation-Randomized Controlled Trials

Neuromodulation is a treatment strategy that is increasingly being utilized in those suffering from drug-resistant epilepsy who are not appropriate for resective surgery. The number of double-blinded RCTs demonstrating the efficacy of neurostimulation in persons with epilepsy is increasing. Although reductions in seizure frequency is common in these trials, obtaining seizure freedom is rare. Invasive neuromodulation procedures (DBS, VNS, and RNS) have been approved as therapeutic measures. However, further investigations are necessary to delineate effective targeting, minimize side effects that are related to chronic implantation and to improve the cost effectiveness of these devices. The RCTs of non-invasive modes of neuromodulation whilst showing much promise (tDCS, eTNS, rTMS), require larger powered studies as well as studies that focus at better targeting techniques. We provide a review of double-blinded randomized clinical trials that have been conducted for neuromodulation in epilepsy.

Intracerebral electroencephalography in targeting anterior thalamic nucleus for deep brain stimulation in refractory epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Results of DBS of ATN in refractory epilepsy depend on accuracy of the electrode's location. We searched for characteristic intraoperative, intracerebral EEG recording pattern from anterior thalamic nuclei (ATNs) as a biological marker for verifying the electrode's position.

METHODS

There were six patients with refractory epilepsy scheduled for deep brain stimulation (DBS) procedure. At surgery, to map the target, we recorded EEG from each lead of DBS electrodes. One patient underwent a 24 hours EEG with continuous recording from both ATNs before internalization of stimulator units.

RESULTS

In all patients we recorded spontaneous bioelectric activity of ATNs. The pattern of the recording from the ATN was similar in all cases. In the one patient where 24-hour recording was done with simultaneous scalp EEG, a complex partial seizure was captured.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of using DBS electrode for intraoperative EEG recordings from the ATN in patients with refractory epilepsy. Since we managed to find the characteristic pattern of bioelectric activity of ATN, this technique seems to be a promising method for targeting this structure during the operation.

Deep brain and cortical stimulation for epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Despite optimal medical treatment, including epilepsy surgery, many epilepsy patients have uncontrolled seizures. Since the 1970s interest has grown in invasive intracranial neurostimulation as a treatment for these patients. Intracranial stimulation includes both deep brain stimulation (DBS) (stimulation through depth electrodes) and cortical stimulation (subdural electrodes). This is an updated version of a previous Cochrane review published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of DBS and cortical stimulation for refractory epilepsy based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register on 29 September 2015, but it was not necessary to update this search, because records in the Specialized Register are included in CENTRAL. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 11, 5 November 2016), PubMed (5 November 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (5 November 2016), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ICTRP (5 November 2016) and reference lists of retrieved articles. We also contacted device manufacturers and other researchers in the field. No language restrictions were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing deep brain or cortical stimulation versus sham stimulation, resective surgery, further treatment with antiepileptic drugs or other neurostimulation treatments (including vagus nerve stimulation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently selected trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently extracted the relevant data and assessed trial quality and overall quality of evidence. The outcomes investigated were seizure freedom, responder rate, percentage seizure frequency reduction, adverse events, neuropsychological outcome and quality of life. If additional data were needed, the study investigators were contacted. Results were analysed and reported separately for different intracranial targets for reasons of clinical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve RCTs were identified, eleven of these compared one to three months of intracranial neurostimulation with sham stimulation. One trial was on anterior thalamic DBS (n = 109; 109 treatment periods); two trials on centromedian thalamic DBS (n = 20; 40 treatment periods), but only one of the trials (n = 7; 14 treatment periods) reported sufficient information for inclusion in the quantitative meta-analysis; three trials on cerebellar stimulation (n = 22; 39 treatment periods); three trials on hippocampal DBS (n = 15; 21 treatment periods); one trial on nucleus accumbens DBS (n = 4; 8 treatment periods); and one trial on responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (n = 191; 191 treatment periods). In addition, one small RCT (n = 6) compared six months of hippocampal DBS versus sham stimulation. Evidence of selective reporting was present in four trials and the possibility of a carryover effect complicating interpretation of the results could not be excluded in five cross-over trials without any or a sufficient washout period. Moderate-quality evidence could not demonstrate statistically or clinically significant changes in the proportion of patients who were seizure-free or experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (primary outcome measures) after one to three months of anterior thalamic DBS in (multi)focal epilepsy, responsive ictal onset zone stimulation in (multi)focal epilepsy patients and hippocampal DBS in (medial) temporal lobe epilepsy. However, a statistically significant reduction in seizure frequency was found for anterior thalamic DBS (mean difference (MD), -17.4% compared to sham stimulation; 95% confidence interval (CI) -31.2 to -1.0; high-quality evidence), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (MD -24.9%; 95% CI -40.1 to -6.0; high-quality evidence) and hippocampal DBS (MD -28.1%; 95% CI -34.1 to -22.2; moderate-quality evidence). Both anterior thalamic DBS and responsive ictal onset zone stimulation do not have a clinically meaningful impact on quality life after three months of stimulation (high-quality evidence). Electrode implantation resulted in postoperative asymptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in 1.6% to 3.7% of the patients included in the two largest trials and 2.0% to 4.5% had postoperative soft tissue infections (9.4% to 12.7% after five years); no patient reported permanent symptomatic sequelae. Anterior thalamic DBS was associated with fewer epilepsy-associated injuries (7.4 versus 25.5%; P = 0.01) but higher rates of self-reported depression (14.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.02) and subjective memory impairment (13.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.03); there were no significant differences in formal neuropsychological testing results between the groups. Responsive ictal-onset zone stimulation seemed to be well-tolerated with few side effects.The limited number of patients preclude firm statements on safety and tolerability of hippocampal DBS. With regards to centromedian thalamic DBS, nucleus accumbens DBS and cerebellar stimulation, no statistically significant effects could be demonstrated but evidence is of only low to very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Except for one very small RCT, only short-term RCTs on intracranial neurostimulation for epilepsy are available. Compared to sham stimulation, one to three months of anterior thalamic DBS ((multi)focal epilepsy), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation ((multi)focal epilepsy) and hippocampal DBS (temporal lobe epilepsy) moderately reduce seizure frequency in refractory epilepsy patients. Anterior thalamic DBS is associated with higher rates of self-reported depression and subjective memory impairment. There is insufficient evidence to make firm conclusive statements on the efficacy and safety of hippocampal DBS, centromedian thalamic DBS, nucleus accumbens DBS and cerebellar stimulation. There is a need for more, large and well-designed RCTs to validate and optimize the efficacy and safety of invasive intracranial neurostimulation treatments.

Optogenetic Approaches for Controlling Seizure Activity

Optogenetics, a technique that utilizes light-sensitive ion channels or pumps to activate or inhibit neurons, has allowed scientists unprecedented precision and control for manipulating neuronal activity. With the clinical need to develop more precise and effective therapies for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, these tools have recently been explored as a novel treatment for halting seizure activity in various animal models. In this review, we provide a detailed and current summary of these optogenetic approaches and provide a perspective on their future clinical application as a potential neuromodulatory therapy.

Clinical Outcome of Patients with Deep Brain Stimulation of the Centromedian Thalamic Nucleus for Refractory Epilepsy and Location of the Active Contacts

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical outcome of patients treated with chronic deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the centromedian nucleus (CM) for refractory epilepsy and to determine the location of active contacts.

METHODS

The outcome of CM stimulation was evaluated as percent seizure reduction compared to the baseline 3 months. To establish the location of active contacts, 27 leads were studied in 14 patients with refractory epilepsy. An analysis was conducted to reveal whether any coordinates of the center of the active contacts predicted percent seizure reduction.

RESULTS

With an average follow-up of 18.2 ± 5.6 months, the mean percent seizure reduction (n = 14) was 68 ± 22.4% (25-100%). Eleven of the 14 patients (78.6%) achieved >50% improvement in seizure frequency. Specifically, all 4 patients (100%) with generalized epilepsy (Lennox-Gastaut syndrome) and 7 of 10 patients (70%) with multilobar epilepsy showed >50% reduction in seizure frequency. The mean coordinates of the center of the active contact were located in the superior part of the anterior ventrolateral CM. The calculated coordinates of laterality from midline (x), anterior-posterior (y) and height (z) from the posterior commissure did not correlate with seizure outcome measured by percent seizure reduction. However, the locations of active contacts used during chronic CM stimulation in multilobar epilepsy were identified more dorsal to those used in generalized epilepsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic CM stimulation is a safe and effective means in the treatment of refractory epilepsy.

Chemogenetic silencing of the midline and intralaminar thalamus blocks amygdala-kindled seizures

Temporal lobe epilepsy is the most common form of medically-intractable epilepsy. While seizures in TLE originate in structures such as hippocampus, amygdala, and temporal cortex, they propagate through a crucial relay: the midline/intralaminar thalamus. Prior studies have shown that pharmacological inhibition of midline thalamus attenuates limbic seizures. Here, we examined a recently developed technology, Designer Receptors Exclusively Activated by Designer Drugs (DREADDs), as a means of chemogenetic silencing to attenuate limbic seizures. Adult, male rats were electrically kindled from the amygdala, and injected with virus coding for inhibitory (hM4Di) DREADDs into the midline/intralaminar thalamus. When treated with the otherwise inert ligand Clozapine-N-Oxide (CNO) at doses of 2.5, 5, and 10mg/kg, electrographic and behavioral seizure manifestations were suppressed in comparison to vehicle. At higher doses, we found complete blockade of seizure activity in a subset of subjects. CNO displayed a sharp time-response profile, with significant seizure attenuation seen 20-30min post injection, in comparison to 10 and 40min post injection. Seizures in animals injected with a control vector (i.e., no DREADD) were unaffected by CNO administration. These data underscore the crucial role of the midline/intralaminar thalamus in the propagation of seizures, specifically in the amygdala kindling model, and provide validation of chemogenetic silencing of limbic seizures.

Neurostimulation to improve level of consciousness in patients with epilepsy

When drug-resistant epilepsy is poorly localized or surgical resection is contraindicated, current neurostimulation strategies such as deep brain stimulation and vagal nerve stimulation can palliate the frequency or severity of seizures. However, despite medical and neuromodulatory therapy, a significant proportion of patients continue to experience disabling seizures that impair awareness, causing disability and risking injury or sudden unexplained death. We propose a novel strategy in which neuromodulation is used not only to reduce seizures but also to ameliorate impaired consciousness when the patient is in the ictal and postictal states. Improving or preventing alterations in level of consciousness may have an effect on morbidity (e.g., accidents, drownings, falls), risk for death, and quality of life. Recent studies may have elucidated underlying networks and mechanisms of impaired consciousness and yield potential novel targets for neuromodulation. The feasibility, benefits, and pitfalls of potential deep brain stimulation targets are illustrated in human and animal studies involving minimally conscious/vegetative states, movement disorders, depth of anesthesia, sleep-wake regulation, and epilepsy. We review evidence that viable therapeutic targets for impaired consciousness associated with seizures may be provided by key nodes of the consciousness system in the brainstem reticular activating system, hypothalamus, basal ganglia, thalamus, and basal forebrain.

Controlling Cerebellar Output to Treat Refractory Epilepsy

Generalized epilepsy is characterized by recurrent seizures caused by oscillatory neuronal firing throughout thalamocortical networks. Current therapeutic approaches often intervene at the level of the thalamus or cerebral cortex to ameliorate seizures. We review here the therapeutic potential of cerebellar stimulation. The cerebellum forms a prominent ascending input to the thalamus and, whereas stimulation of the foliated cerebellar cortex exerts inconsistent results, stimulation of the centrally located cerebellar nuclei (CN) reliably stops generalized seizures in experimental models. Stimulation of this area indicates that the period of stimulation with respect to the phase of the oscillations in thalamocortical networks can optimize its effect, opening up the possibility of developing on-demand deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatments.

Neuromodulation for Epilepsy

Several palliative neuromodulation treatment modalities are currently available for adjunctive use in the treatment of medically intractable epilepsy. Over the past decades, a variety of different central and peripheral nervous system sites have been identified, clinically and experimentally, as potential targets for chronic, nonresponsive therapeutic neurostimulation. Currently, the main modalities in clinical use, from most invasive to least invasive, are anterior thalamus deep brain stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, and trigeminal nerve stimulation. Significant reductions in seizure frequency have been demonstrated in clinical trials using each of these neuromodulation therapies.

Deep brain and cortical stimulation for epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Despite optimal medical treatment, including epilepsy surgery, many epilepsy patients have uncontrolled seizures. In the last decades, interest has grown in invasive intracranial neurostimulation as a treatment for these patients. Intracranial stimulation includes both deep brain stimulation (DBS) (stimulation through depth electrodes) and cortical stimulation (subdural electrodes).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of deep brain and cortical stimulation for refractory epilepsy based on randomized controlled trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed (6 August 2013), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (31 August 2013), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7 of 12) and reference lists of retrieved articles. We also contacted device manufacturers and other researchers in the field. No language restrictions were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing deep brain or cortical stimulation to sham stimulation, resective surgery or further treatment with antiepileptic drugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently selected trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently extracted the relevant data and assessed trial quality and overall quality of evidence. The outcomes investigated were seizure freedom, responder rate, percentage seizure frequency reduction, adverse events, neuropsychological outcome and quality of life. If additional data were needed, the study investigators were contacted. Results were analysed and reported separately for different intracranial targets for reasons of clinical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten RCTs comparing one to three months of intracranial neurostimulation to sham stimulation were identified. One trial was on anterior thalamic DBS (n = 109; 109 treatment periods); two trials on centromedian thalamic DBS (n = 20; 40 treatment periods), but only one of the trials (n = 7; 14 treatment periods) reported sufficient information for inclusion in the quantitative meta-analysis; three trials on cerebellar stimulation (n = 22; 39 treatment periods); three trials on hippocampal DBS (n = 15; 21 treatment periods); and one trial on responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (n = 191; 191 treatment periods). Evidence of selective reporting was present in four trials and the possibility of a carryover effect complicating interpretation of the results could not be excluded in 4 cross-over trials without any washout period. Moderate-quality evidence could not demonstrate statistically or clinically significant changes in the proportion of patients who were seizure-free or experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (primary outcome measures) after 1 to 3 months of anterior thalamic DBS in (multi)focal epilepsy, responsive ictal onset zone stimulation in (multi)focal epilepsy patients and hippocampal DBS in (medial) temporal lobe epilepsy. However, a statistically significant reduction in seizure frequency was found for anterior thalamic DBS (-17.4% compared to sham stimulation; 95% confidence interval (CI) -32.1 to -1.0; high-quality evidence), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (-24.9%; 95% CI -40.1 to 6.0; high-quality evidence) ) and hippocampal DBS (-28.1%; 95% CI -34.1 to -22.2; moderate-quality evidence). Both anterior thalamic DBS and responsive ictal onset zone stimulation do not have a clinically meaningful impact on quality life after three months of stimulation (high-quality evidence). Electrode implantation resulted in asymptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in 3% to 4% of the patients included in the two largest trials and 5% to 13% had soft tissue infections; no patient reported permanent symptomatic sequelae. Anterior thalamic DBS was associated with fewer epilepsy-associated injuries (7.4 versus 25.5%; P = 0.01) but higher rates of self-reported depression (14.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.02) and subjective memory impairment (13.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.03); there were no significant differences in formal neuropsychological testing results between the groups. Responsive ictal-onset zone stimulation was well tolerated with few side effects but SUDEP rate should be closely monitored in the future (4 per 340 [= 11.8 per 1000] patient-years; literature: 2.2-10 per 1000 patient-years). The limited number of patients preclude firm statements on safety and tolerability of hippocampal DBS. With regards to centromedian thalamic DBS and cerebellar stimulation, no statistically significant effects could be demonstrated but evidence is of only low to very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only short term RCTs on intracranial neurostimulation for epilepsy are available. Compared to sham stimulation, one to three months of anterior thalamic DBS ((multi)focal epilepsy), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation ((multi)focal epilepsy) and hippocampal DBS (temporal lobe epilepsy) moderately reduce seizure frequency in refractory epilepsy patients. Anterior thalamic DBS is associated with higher rates of self-reported depression and subjective memory impairment. SUDEP rates require careful monitoring in patients undergoing responsive ictal onset zone stimulation. There is insufficient evidence to make firm conclusive statements on the efficacy and safety of hippocampal DBS, centromedian thalamic DBS and cerebellar stimulation. There is a need for more, large and well-designed RCTs to validate and optimize the efficacy and safety of invasive intracranial neurostimulation treatments.

Effects of responsive electrical brain stimulation on intracranial electroencephalogram spikes

OBJECTIVES

Responsive cortical electrical stimulation with implanted devices is under investigation for seizures. While designed to terminate seizures, might this stimulation also affect the underlying epileptic process of seizure generation?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four patients undergoing intracranial electroencephalogram (EEG) for seizure localization had an external responsive neurostimulator (eRNS) connected to their seizure-onset zones. The eRNS detected interictal EEG spikes and stimulated at the focus. We quantified spikes at three locations: (1) near stimulation, (2) remote but in the same lobe as stimulation, and (3) in different lobe from stimulation. Ten-minute windows were analyzed at three times: (1) baseline, (2) after the first four hours of stimulation, and (3) poststimulation. One blinded investigator performed manual spike counts. Quantitative measures were total spikes, spike-free intervals (continuous ten-sec segments with no spikes), and spike clusters (one-sec intervals with three or more spikes).

RESULTS

Some changes in spikes occurred in each patient, but no uniform pattern emerged. Two general observations were made: (1) spike counts within a given patient exhibited internally consistent changes with stimulation; (2) across patients, the nature of spike count changes varied, indicating patient-to-patient variability. For example, poststimulation, two patients had more and two patients had fewer total spikes. However, when spikes decreased near stimulation, they decreased at other sites, and when spikes increased near stimulation, they increased at other sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in spike occurrence, organization, and topography with stimulation suggest the eRNS affected spike generation and may affect the underlying interictal epileptic process. Case-to-case variability may be due to individual patient factors, and its significance is yet to be determined.

Electrical brain stimulation for epilepsy

Neurostimulation enables adjustable and reversible modulation of disease symptoms, including those of epilepsy. Two types of brain neuromodulation, comprising anterior thalamic deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation at seizure foci, are supported by Class I evidence of effectiveness, and many other sites in the brain have been targeted in small trials of neurostimulation therapy for seizures. Animal studies have mainly assisted in the identification of potential neurostimulation sites and parameters, but much of the clinical work is only loosely based on fundamental principles derived from the laboratory, and the mechanisms by which brain neurostimulation reduces seizures remain poorly understood. The benefits of stimulation tend to increase over time, with maximal effect seen typically 1-2 years after implantation. Typical reductions of seizure frequency are approximately 40% acutely, and 50-69% after several years. Seizure intensity might also be reduced. Complications from brain neurostimulation are mainly associated with the implantation procedure and hardware, including stimulation-related paraesthesias, stimulation-site infections, electrode mistargeting and, in some patients, triggered seizures or even status epilepticus. Further preclinical and clinical experience with brain stimulation surgery should lead to improved outcomes by increasing our understanding of the optimal surgical candidates, sites and parameters.

Anterior Cingulate epilepsy: mechanisms and modulation

Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, about 1% population worldwide suffered from this disease. In 1989, the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) classified anterior cingulate epilepsy as a form of frontal lobe epilepsy (FLE). FLE is the second most common type of epilepsy. Previous clinical studies showed that FLE account an important cause in refractory epilepsy, therefore to find alternative approach to modulate FLE is very important. Basic research using animal models and brain slice have revealed some insights on the epileptogenesis and modulation of seizure in anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Interneurons play an important role in the synchronization of cingulate epilepsy. Research has shown that the epileptogenesis of seizure originated from mesial frontal lobe might be caused by a selective increase in nicotine-evoked γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) inhibition, because the application of the GABA_A receptor antagonist picrotoxin inhibited epileptic discharges. Gap junctions are also involved in the regulation of cingulate epilepsy. Previous studies have shown that the application of gap junction blockers could attenuate ACC seizures, while gap junction opener could enhance them in an in vitro preparation. μ-Opioid receptors have been shown to be involved in the epileptic synchronization mechanism in ACC seizures in a brain slice preparation. Application of the μ-opioid agonist DAMGO significantly abolished the ictal discharges in a 4-aminopyridine induced electrographic seizure model in ACC. Basic research has also found that thalamic modulation has an inhibitory effect on ACC seizures. Studies have shown that the medial thalamus may be a target for deep brain stimulation to cure ACC seizures.

Clinical utility of implantable neurostimulation devices as adjunctive treatment of uncontrolled seizures

About one third of patients with epilepsy are refractory to medical treatment. For these patients, alternative treatment options include implantable neurostimulation devices such as vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and responsive neurostimulation systems (RNS). We conducted a systematic literature review to assess the available evidence on the clinical efficacy of these devices in patients with refractory epilepsy across their lifespan. VNS has the largest evidence base, and numerous randomized controlled trials and open-label studies support its use in the treatment of refractory epilepsy. It was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1997 for treatment of partial seizures, but has also shown significant benefit in the treatment of generalized seizures. Results in adult populations have been more encouraging than in pediatric populations, where more studies are required. VNS is considered a safe and well-tolerated treatment, and serious side effects are rare. DBS is a well-established treatment for several movement disorders, and has a small evidence base for treatment of refractory epilepsy. Stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus has shown the most encouraging results, where significant decreases in seizure frequency were reported. Other potential targets include the centromedian thalamic nucleus, hippocampus, cerebellum, and basal ganglia structures. Preliminary results on RNS, new-generation implantable neurostimulation devices which stimulate brain structures only when epileptic activity is detected, are encouraging. Overall, implantable neurostimulation devices appear to be a safe and beneficial treatment option for patients in whom medical treatment has failed to adequately control their epilepsy. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to provide a sufficient evidence base for the inclusion of DBS and RNS in clinical guidelines.