Dataset Information

Vagus Nerve Stimulation Therapy for the Treatment of Seizures in Refractory Postencephalitic Epilepsy: A Retrospective Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for patients with refractory epilepsy, but there are few reports on the use of VNS for postencephalitic epilepsy (PEE). This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of VNS for refractory PEE.

Methods

We retrospectively studied 20 patients with refractory PEE who underwent VNS between August 2017 and October 2019 in Chinese PLA General Hospital and Beijing Children's Hospital. VNS efficacy was evaluated based on seizure reduction, effective rate (percentage of cases with seizure reduction ≥ 50%), McHugh classification, modified Early Childhood Epilepsy Severity Scale (E-Chess) score, and Grand Total EEG (GTE) score. The follow-up time points were 3, 6, and 12 months after VNS. Pre- and postoperative data were compared and analyzed.

Results

The median [interquartile range (IQR)] seizure reduction rates at 3, 6, and 12 months after VNS were 23.72% (0, 55%), 46.61% (0, 79.04%), and 67.99% (0, 93.78%), respectively. The effective rates were 30% at 3 months, 45% at 6 months, and 70% at 12 months. E-chess scores before the operation and at 3, 6, and 12 months after the operation were 10 (10, 10.75), 9 (9, 10), 9 (9, 9.75), and 9 (8.25, 9) (P < 0.05), respectively. GTE scores before surgery and at 12 months after the operation were 11 (9, 13) and 9 (7, 11) (P < 0.05), respectively. The mean intensity of VNS current was 1.76 ± 0.39 (range: 1.0-2.5) mA. No intraoperative complications or severe post-operative adverse effects were reported.

Conclusions

Our study shows that VNS can reduce the frequency and severity of seizure in patients with refractory PEE. VNS has a good application prospect in patients with refractory PEE.

SUBMITTER: Sun Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8418307 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesRefractory epilepsy is a diagnosis of recurrent seizures that requires multiple resources for optimal chronic management. The disease negatively impacts the lives of affected patients and families and poses an economic burden to the health care system. This study compares hospital costs between pediatric patients treated with antiseizure medications (ASMs) only and ASMs plus vagus nerve stimulation (VNS).MethodsPatients 0-17 years of age who were diagnosed with refractory epilepsy between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016, were identified from the Children's Hospital Association's Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database. Patients treated with ASMs only or ASMs plus VNS were included in the study and were followed 1 year prior and 2 years after meeting pre-determined criteria for refractory epilepsy. The difference-in-difference (DID) approach along with the two-part model was used to compare the changes in mean hospital costs captured in the PHIS database over time between the two cohorts.ResultsOne thousand one hundred thirteen patients treated with ASMs plus VNS and 3471 patients treated with ASMs only were included. At a follow-up time of 2 years, for the ASMs-only cohort, the adjusted all-cause and epilepsy-related mean annual total costs increased by $14 715 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $12 375-$17 055) and $18 437 (95% CI: $15 978-$20 896), respectively. By comparison, the adjusted all-cause and epilepsy-related mean annual total costs of the ASMs plus VNS cohort increased by $12 838 (95% CI: $8171-$17 505) and $15 183 (95% CI: $10 253-$20 113), respectively. Compared to ASMs only, ASMs plus VNS generated a cost savings of $3254 for epilepsy-related annual costs per year after the index date.SignificanceCompared to ASMs alone, ASMs plus VNS is a treatment modality associated with lower annual hospital costs over time. Our study shows that VNS is a cost-beneficial treatment for a national cohort of pediatric patients with refractory epilepsy.

Project description:Introduction: VNS is an adjunctive neuromodulation therapy for patients with drug-refractory epilepsy. The antiseizure effect of VNS is thought to be related to a diffuse modulation of functional connectivity but remains to be confirmed. Aim: To investigate electroencephalographic (EEG) metrics of functional connectivity in patients with drug-refractory epilepsy treated by vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), between VNS-stimulated "ON" and nonstimulated "OFF" periods and between responder (R) and nonresponder (NR) patients. Methods: Scalp-EEG was performed for 35 patients treated by VNS, using 21 channels and 2 additional electrodes on the neck to detect the VNS stimulation. Patients were defined as VNS responders if a reduction of seizure frequency of ∼50% was documented. We analyzed the synchronization in EEG time series during "ON" and "OFF" periods of stimulation, using average phase lag index (PLI) in signal space and phase-locking value (PLV) between 10 sources. Based on graph theory, we computed brain network models and analyzed minimum spanning tree (MST) for responder and nonresponder patients. Results: Among 35 patients treated by VNS for a median time of 7 years (range 4 months to 22 years), 20 were R and 15 were NR. For responder patients, PLI during ON periods was significantly lower than that during OFF periods in delta (p = 0.009), theta (p = 0.02), and beta (p = 0.04) frequency bands. For nonresponder patients, there were no significant differences between ON and OFF periods. Moreover, variations of seizure frequency with VNS correlated with the PLI OFF/ON ratio in delta (p = 0.02), theta (p = 0.04), and beta (p = 0.03) frequency bands. Our results were confirmed using PLV in theta band (p < 0.05). No significant differences in MST were observed between R and NR patients. Conclusion: The correlation between VNS-induced interictal EEG time-series desynchronization and decrease in seizure frequency suggested that VNS therapeutic impact might be related to changes in interictal functional connectivity. Impact statement Electroencephalography (EEG) desynchronization has been proposed to be a mechanism for antiepileptic effect of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS). We measured interictal EEG time-series synchronization during stimulated (ON) and nonstimulated (OFF) periods in epileptic patients treated by VNS. Phase lag index differences between ON and OFF periods were measured in delta, theta, and beta bands only in responder patients. To our knowledge, our study is the first to statistically correlate interictal cortical desynchronization during ON periods with reduction in seizure frequency. Our result supports the hypothesis that the antiseizure effect of VNS is mediated by cortical desynchronization.

Project description:ContextThe use of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) to reduce or stop electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in treatment-resistant depression seems promising. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of VNS on the reduction of ECT sessions and mood stabilization.MethodsWe conducted a monocentric retrospective case series of patients who suffered from treatment-resistant depression, treated with ECT and referred to our center for VNS. We investigated the number and the frequency of ECT sessions before and after VNS implantation. Secondary criteria consisted in the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score, number of medical treatments, dosage of the main treatment and length of hospital stays before and after VNS. Additionally, we sent an anonymous survey to psychiatrists and other physicians in our institution to investigate their knowledge and perception of VNS therapy to treat treatment-resistant depression.ResultsSeven patients benefited from VNS: six (86%) were female (mean age of 51.7 +/- 16.0 years at surgery), and five (71%) suffered from bipolar depression (three type I and two type II). All patients were followed up at least 2 years post-implantation (range: 27-68 months). Prior to VNS, six patients were treated by maintenance ECT. After VNS, three (43%) patients did not require maintenance ECT anymore, and three (43%) patients required less frequent ECT session with a mean 14.7 +/- 9.8 weeks between sessions after VNS vs. 2.9 +/- 0.8 weeks before VNS. At last follow-up, 4 (57%) patients had stopped ECT. Five (71%) patients implanted with VNS were good responders (50% decrease relative to baseline MADRS). According to the survey, psychiatrists had a significantly better perception and knowledge of ECT, but a worse perception and knowledge of VNS compared to other physicians.ConclusionVNS is a good option for treatment-resistant depression requiring maintenance ECT dependence. Larger on-going studies will help broaden the implanted patients while strengthening psychiatrists' knowledge on this therapy.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study was undertaken to estimate the cost-effectiveness of deep brain stimulation (DBS) compared with vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and care as usual (CAU) for adult patients with refractory epilepsy from a health care perspective using a lifetime decision analytic model.MethodsA Markov decision analytic model was constructed to estimate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of DBS compared with VNS and CAU. Transition probabilities were estimated from a randomized controlled trial, and assumptions were made in consensus with an expert panel. Primary outcomes were expressed as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and per responder. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to characterize parameter uncertainty.ResultsIn DBS, 28.4% of the patients were responders, with an average of 21.38 QALYs per patient and expected lifetime health care costs of €187 791. VNS had fewer responders (22.3%), fewer QALYs (20.70), and lower lifetime costs (€156 871). CAU had the fewest responders (6.2%), fewest QALYs (18.74), and lowest total health care costs (€64 670). When comparing with CAU, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed that costs per QALY gained were slightly lower for DBS (€46 640) than for VNS (€47 155). When comparing DBS with VNS, an incremental cost per additional QALY gained of €45 170 was found for DBS. Sensitivity analyses showed that ICERs were heavily dependent on assumptions regarding loss to follow-up in the respective clinical trial.SignificanceThis study suggests that, given current limited evidence, VNS and DBS are potentially cost-effective treatment strategies compared to CAU for patients with refractory epilepsy. However, results for DBS were heavily impacted by assumptions made to extrapolate nonresponse from the original trial. More stringent assumptions regarding nonresponse resulted in an ICER just above an acceptable willingness to pay threshold. Given the uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of DBS and the large impact of assumptions related to nonresponse, further empirical research is needed to reduce uncertainty.