Dataset Information

Sleep disruption is not observed with brain-responsive neurostimulation for epilepsy.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Neurostimulation devices that deliver electrical impulses to the nervous system are widely used to treat seizures in patients with medically refractory epilepsy, but the effects of these therapies on sleep are incompletely understood. Vagus nerve stimulation can contribute to obstructive sleep apnea, and thalamic deep brain stimulation can cause sleep disruption. A device for brain-responsive neurostimulation (RNS^® System, NeuroPace, Inc) is well tolerated in clinical trials, but potential effects on sleep are unknown.

Methods

Six adults with medically refractory focal epilepsy treated for at least six months with the RNS System underwent a single night of polysomnography (PSG). RNS System lead locations included mesial temporal and neocortical targets. Sleep stages and arousals were scored according to standard guidelines. Stimulations delivered by the RNS System in response to detections of epileptiform activity were identified by artifacts on scalp electroencephalography.

Results

One subject was excluded for technical reasons related to unreliable identification of stimulation artifact on EEG during PSG. In the remaining five subjects, PSG showed fragmented sleep with frequent arousals. Arousal histograms aligned to stimulations revealed a significant peak in arousals just before stimulation. In one of these subjects, the arousal peak began before stimulation and extended ~1 seconds after stimulation. A peak in arousals occurring only after stimulation was not observed.

Significance

In this small cohort of patients, brain-responsive neurostimulation does not appear to disrupt sleep. If confirmed in larger studies, this could represent a potential clinical advantage of brain-responsive neurostimulation over other neurostimulation modalities.

SUBMITTER: Ruoff L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7278540 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sleep disruption is not observed with brain-responsive neurostimulation for epilepsy.

Ruoff Leslie L Jarosiewicz Beata B Zak Rochelle R Tcheng Thomas K TK Neylan Thomas C TC Rao Vikram R VR

Epilepsia open 20200221 2

<h4>Objective</h4>Neurostimulation devices that deliver electrical impulses to the nervous system are widely used to treat seizures in patients with medically refractory epilepsy, but the effects of these therapies on sleep are incompletely understood. Vagus nerve stimulation can contribute to obstructive sleep apnea, and thalamic deep brain stimulation can cause sleep disruption. A device for brain-responsive neurostimulation (RNS<sup>®</sup> System, NeuroPace, Inc) is well tolerated in clinica ...[more]

PMID: 32524041

Similar Datasets

Project description:Responsive neurostimulation is a promising treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy; however, clinical outcomes are highly variable across individuals. The therapeutic mechanism of responsive neurostimulation likely involves modulatory effects on brain networks; however, with no known biomarkers that predict clinical response, patient selection remains empiric. This study aimed to determine whether functional brain connectivity measured non-invasively prior to device implantation predicts clinical response to responsive neurostimulation therapy. Resting-state magnetoencephalography was obtained in 31 participants with subsequent responsive neurostimulation device implantation between 15 August 2014 and 1 October 2020. Functional connectivity was computed across multiple spatial scales (global, hemispheric, and lobar) using pre-implantation magnetoencephalography and normalized to maps of healthy controls. Normalized functional connectivity was investigated as a predictor of clinical response, defined as percent change in self-reported seizure frequency in the most recent year of clinic visits relative to pre-responsive neurostimulation baseline. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve quantified the performance of functional connectivity in predicting responders (≥50% reduction in seizure frequency) and non-responders (<50%). Leave-one-out cross-validation was furthermore performed to characterize model performance. The relationship between seizure frequency reduction and frequency-specific functional connectivity was further assessed as a continuous measure. Across participants, stimulation was enabled for a median duration of 52.2 (interquartile range, 27.0-62.3) months. Demographics, seizure characteristics, and responsive neurostimulation lead configurations were matched across 22 responders and 9 non-responders. Global functional connectivity in the alpha and beta bands were lower in non-responders as compared with responders (alpha, pfdr < 0.001; beta, pfdr < 0.001). The classification of responsive neurostimulation outcome was improved by combining feature inputs; the best model incorporated four features (i.e. mean and dispersion of alpha and beta bands) and yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.970 (0.919-1.00). The leave-one-out cross-validation analysis of this four-feature model yielded a sensitivity of 86.3%, specificity of 77.8%, positive predictive value of 90.5%, and negative predictive value of 70%. Global functional connectivity in alpha band correlated with seizure frequency reduction (alpha, P = 0.010). Global functional connectivity predicted responder status more strongly, as compared with hemispheric predictors. Lobar functional connectivity was not a predictor. These findings suggest that non-invasive functional connectivity may be a candidate personalized biomarker that has the potential to predict responsive neurostimulation effectiveness and to identify patients most likely to benefit from responsive neurostimulation therapy. Follow-up large-cohort, prospective studies are required to validate this biomarker. These findings furthermore support an emerging view that the therapeutic mechanism of responsive neurostimulation involves network-level effects in the brain.

Project description:IntroductionOne-third of patients with epilepsy continue to have seizures despite antiepileptic medications. Some of these refractory patients may not be candidates for surgical resection primarily because the seizure onset zones (SOZs) involve both hemispheres or are located in eloquent areas. The NeuroPace Responsive Neurostimulation System (RNS) is a closed-loop device that uses programmable detection and stimulation to tailor therapy to a patient's individual neurophysiology. Here, we present our single-center experience with the use of RNS in thalamic nuclei to provide long-term seizure control in patients with refractory epilepsy.MethodsWe performed a prospective single-center study of consecutive refractory epilepsy patients who underwent RNS system implantation in the anterior (ANT) and centromedian (CM) thalamic nuclei from September 2015 to December 2020. Patients were followed postoperatively to evaluate seizure freedom and complications.ResultsTwenty-three patients underwent placement of 36 RNS thalamic leads (CM = 27 leads, ANT = 9 leads). Mean age at implant was 18.8 ± 11.2 years (range 7.8-62 years-old). Two patients (8.7%) developed infections: 1 improved with antibiotic treatments alone, and 1 required removal with eventual replacement of the system to recover the therapeutic benefit. Mean time from RNS implantation to last follow-up was 22.3 months. Based on overall reduction of seizure frequency, 2 patients (8.7%) had no- to <25% improvement, 6 patients (26.1%) had 25-49% improvement, 14 patients (60.9%) had 50-99% improvement, and 1 patient (4.3%) became seizure-free. All patients reported significant improvement in seizure duration and severity, and 17 patients (74%) reported improved post-ictal state. There was a trend for subjects with SOZs located in the temporal lobe to achieve better outcomes after thalamic RNS compared to those with extratemporal SOZs. Of note, seizure etiology was syndromic in 12 cases (52.2%), and 7 patients (30.4%) had undergone resection/disconnection surgery prior to thalamic RNS therapy.ConclusionThalamic RNS achieved ≥50% seizure control in ~65% of patients. Infections were the most common complication. This therapeutic modality may be particularly useful for patients affected by aggressive epilepsy syndromes since a young age, those whose seizure foci are located in the mesial temporal lobe, and those who have failed prior surgical interventions.

Project description:ObjectiveThe RNS System is a direct brain-responsive neurostimulation system that is US Food and Drug Administration-approved for adults with medically intractable focal onset seizures based on safety and effectiveness data from controlled clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of the RNS System.MethodsEight comprehensive epilepsy centers conducted a chart review of patients treated with the RNS System for at least 1 year, in accordance with the indication for use. Data included device-related serious adverse events and the median percent change in disabling seizure frequency from baseline at years 1, 2, and 3 of treatment and at the most recent follow-up.ResultsOne hundred fifty patients met the criteria for analysis. The median reduction in seizures was 67% (interquartile range [IQR] = 33%-93%, n = 149) at 1 year, 75% (IQR = 50%-94%, n = 93) at 2 years, 82% (IQR = 50%-96%, n = 38) at ≥3 years, and 74% (IQR = 50%-96%, n = 150) at last follow-up (mean = 2.3 years). Thirty-five percent of patients had a ≥90% seizure frequency reduction, and 18% of patients reported being clinically seizure-free at last follow-up. Seizure frequency reductions were similar regardless of patient age, age at epilepsy onset, duration of epilepsy, seizure onset in mesial temporal or neocortical foci, magnetic resonance imaging findings, prior intracranial monitoring, prior epilepsy surgery, or prior vagus nerve stimulation treatment. The infection rate per procedure was 2.9% (6/150 patients); five of the six patients had an implant site infection, and one had osteomyelitis. Lead revisions were required in 2.7% (4/150), and 2.0% (3/150) of patients had a subdural hemorrhage, none of which had long-lasting neurological consequences.SignificanceIn this real-world experience, safety was similar and clinical seizure outcomes exceeded those of the prospective clinical trials, corroborating effectiveness of this therapy and suggesting that clinical experience has informed more effective programming.

Dataset Information

Sleep disruption is not observed with brain-responsive neurostimulation for epilepsy.

Objective

Methods

Results

Significance

Publications

Sleep disruption is not observed with brain-responsive neurostimulation for epilepsy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets