Chronic bilateral subthalamic stimulation after anterior callosotomy in drug-resistant epilepsy: long-term clinical and functional outcome of two cases

Deep brain stimulation in a patient with progressive myoclonic epilepsy and ataxia due to potassium channel mutation (MEAK). A case report and review of the literature

Progressive myoclonic epilepsy (PME) is characterized by prominent myoclonus, generalized tonic-clonic seizures, and less often focal, tonic, or absence seizures. The KCNC1 mutation is responsible for specific clinical phenotype of PME which has been defined as myoclonic epilepsy and ataxia due to potassium channel mutation (MEAK). We present a case of a 44 years-old male patient with genetically proven MEAK who underwent subthalamic nucleus/substantia nigra (STN/SNr) deep brain stimulation (DBS) for his pharmacological-refractory myoclonus and drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Since the age of 4-5 years, the patient had been suffering from intention tremor, and later the myoclonic jerks, ataxia involving the upper limbs and walking difficulties worsened. The first bilateral tonic-clonic seizure (BTCS) occurred at the age of 22. The patient agreed to staged bilateral implantation of DBS electrodes placed in the STN/SNr region. The follow-up lasts more than 24 months. The myoclonic jerks assessed by Unified Myoclonus Rating Scale (UMRS) were reduced by nearly 70 % and BTCS was completely abolished. The patient's ataxia and dysarthria did not improve. Early diagnosis with genetic testing may significantly help in counseling patients with PME and enables to undertake the surgical approach targeting the STN/SNr.

Long-term efficacy of deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in patients with pharmacologically intractable epilepsy: A case series of six patients

OBJECTIVE

Epilepsy is one of the widespread neurological illnesses, and about 20%-40% of epilepsy patients are pharmacoresistant. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy of subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) for drug-resistant epilepsy.

METHODS

We included pharmacologically intractable epilepsy patients who had STN-DBS at the Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital between June 2016 and December 2018. We retrospectively evaluated pre- and postoperative clinical outcomes, including seizure frequency, seizure type, anti-seizure medication, cognitive function, anatomical target coordinates, stimulation parameters, and adverse events following the surgical procedure. Six patients with a mean follow-up of 49.3 ± 10.2 months, were included.

RESULTS

Seizure frequency decreased by an average of 64.0% after STN-DBS at last year follow-up (p = .046), and one patient (1/6) achieved seizure-free status. For seizure type, anti-seizure medication, and cognitive function, there were no significant differences between pre-and post-operation (p > .05). In terms of stimulation parameters, the pulse width, amplitude, and frequency were 58.3 ± 9.4 μs, 2.5 ± .7 V, and 122.5 ± 15.7 Hz, respectively. None of the patients showed normal electroencephalography during the electroencephalography reexamination. There were no surgery-related complications, and chronic STN stimulation was generally well tolerated in five patients. However, one patient (1/6) had a difficulty of dyskinesia in the right arm.

SIGNIFICANCE

In conclusion, neuromodulation of the STN by DBS is a promising option for patients with pharmacologically intractable epilepsy, especially for whose epileptic zone originates mainly from the frontoparietal region and who are unsuitable for resective surgery. Further prospective multicenter studies with a larger sample size are necessary for further exploration.

Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus for epilepsy

Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS) is a promising palliative option for patients with refractory epilepsy. However, crucial questions remain unanswered: Which patients are the optimal candidates? How, where, and when to stimulate the STN? And what is the mechanism of STN-DBS action on epilepsy? Thus, we reviewed the clinical evidence on the antiepileptic effects of STN-DBS and its possible mechanisms on drug-resistant epilepsy, its safety, and the factors influencing stimulation outcomes. This information may guide clinical decision-making. In addition, based on the current knowledge on the effect of STN-DBS on epilepsy, we suggest research that needs to be carried out in the future.

Intracranial neuromodulation with deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation in children with drug-resistant epilepsy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

In children with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), resective, ablative, and disconnective surgery may not be feasible or may fail. Neuromodulation in the form of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) may be viable treatment options, however evidence for their efficacies in children is currently limited. This systematic review aimed to summarize the literature on DBS and RNS for the treatment of DRE in the pediatric population. Specifically, the authors focused on currently available data for reported indications, neuromodulation targets, clinical efficacy, and safety outcomes.

METHODS

PRISMA guidelines were followed throughout this systematic review (PROSPERO no. CRD42020180669). Electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, and CINAHL Plus, were searched from their inception to February 19, 2021. Inclusion criteria were 1) studies with at least 1 pediatric patient (age < 19 years) who underwent DBS and/or RNS for DRE; and 2) retrospective, prospective, randomized, or nonrandomized controlled studies, case series, and case reports. Exclusion criteria were 1) letters, commentaries, conference abstracts, and reviews; and 2) studies without full text available. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool.

RESULTS

A total of 35 studies were selected that identified 72 and 46 patients who underwent DBS and RNS, respectively (age range 4-18 years). Various epilepsy etiologies and seizure types were described in both cohorts. Overall, 75% of patients had seizure reduction > 50% after DBS (among whom 6 were seizure free) at a median (range) follow-up of 14 (1-100) months. In an exploratory univariate analysis of factors associated with favorable response, the follow-up duration was shorter in those patients with a favorable response (18 vs 33 months, p < 0.05). In the RNS cohort, 73.2% of patients had seizure reduction > 50% after RNS at a median (range) follow-up of 22 (5-39) months. On closer inspection, 83.3% of patients who had > 50% reduction in seizures actually had > 75% reduction, with 4 patients being seizure free.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, both DBS and RNS showed favorable response rates, indicating that both techniques should be considered for pediatric patients with DRE. However, serious risks of overall bias were found in all included studies. Many research needs in this area would be addressed by conducting high-quality clinical trials and establishing an international registry of patients who have undergone pediatric neuromodulation, thereby ensuring robust prospective collection of predictive variables and outcomes.

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.

Open-loop deep brain stimulation for the treatment of epilepsy: a systematic review of clinical outcomes over the past decade (2008-present)

OBJECTIVE The field of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for epilepsy has grown tremendously since its inception in the 1970s and 1980s. The goal of this review is to identify and evaluate all studies published on the topic of open-loop DBS for epilepsy over the past decade (2008 to present). METHODS A PubMed search was conducted to identify all articles reporting clinical outcomes of open-loop DBS for the treatment of epilepsy published since January 1, 2008. The following composite search terms were used: ("epilepsy" [MeSH] OR "seizures" [MeSH] OR "kindling, neurologic" [MeSH] OR epilep* OR seizure* OR convuls*) AND ("deep brain stimulation" [MeSH] OR "deep brain stimulation" OR "DBS") OR ("electric stimulation therapy" [MeSH] OR "electric stimulation therapy" OR "implantable neurostimulators" [MeSH]). RESULTS The authors identified 41 studies that met the criteria for inclusion. The anterior nucleus of the thalamus, centromedian nucleus of the thalamus, and hippocampus were the most frequently evaluated targets. Among the 41 articles, 19 reported on stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus, 6 evaluated stimulation of the centromedian nucleus of the thalamus, and 9 evaluated stimulation of the hippocampus. The remaining 7 articles reported on the evaluation of alternative DBS targets, including the posterior hypothalamus, subthalamic nucleus, ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus, nucleus accumbens, caudal zone incerta, mammillothalamic tract, and fornix. The authors evaluated each study for overall epilepsy response rates as well as adverse events and other significant, nonepilepsy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Level I evidence supports the safety and efficacy of stimulating the anterior nucleus of the thalamus and the hippocampus for the treatment of medically refractory epilepsy. Level III and IV evidence supports stimulation of other targets for epilepsy. Ongoing research into the efficacy, adverse effects, and mechanisms of open-loop DBS continues to expand the knowledge supporting the use of these treatment modalities in patients with refractory epilepsy.

Deep Brain Stimulation and Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Review of the Literature

Introduction: Deep brain stimulation is a safe and effective neurointerventional technique for the treatment of movement disorders. Electrical stimulation of subcortical structures may exert a control on seizure generators initiating epileptic activities. The aim of this review is to present the targets of the deep brain stimulation for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy. Methods: We performed a structured review of the literature from 1980 to 2018 using Medline and PubMed. Articles assessing the impact of deep brain stimulation on seizure frequency in patients with DRE were selected. Meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and observational studies were included. Results: To date, deep brain stimulation of various neural targets has been investigated in animal experiments and humans. This article presents the use of stimulation of the anterior and centromedian nucleus of the thalamus, hippocampus, basal ganglia, cerebellum and hypothalamus. Anterior thalamic stimulation has demonstrated efficacy and there is evidence to recommend it as the target of choice. Conclusion: Deep brain stimulation for seizures may be an option in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Anterior thalamic nucleus stimulation could be recommended over other targets.

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.

Deep brain stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To review clinical evidence on the antiepileptic effects of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for drug-resistant epilepsy, its safety, and the factors influencing individual outcomes.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the medical literature (PubMed, Medline) was conducted to identify relevant articles investigating DBS therapy for drug-resistant epilepsy. Reference lists of these articles were used to source further articles.

RESULTS

Stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) and hippocampus (HC) has been shown to decrease the frequency of refractory seizures. Half of all patients from clinical studies experienced a 46%-90% seizure reduction with ANT-DBS, and a 48%-95% seizure reduction with HC-DBS. The efficacy of stimulating other targets remains inconclusive due to lack of evidence. Approximately three-fourths of patients receiving ANT, HC, or centromedian nucleus of the thalamus (CMT) stimulation are responders-experiencing a seizure reduction of at least 50%. The time course of clinical benefit varies dramatically, with both an initial lesional effect and ongoing stimulation effect at play. Improved quality of life and changes to cognition or mood may also occur. Side effects are similar in nature to those reported from DBS therapy for movement disorders. Several factors are potentially associated with stimulation efficacy, including an absence of structural abnormality on imaging for ANT and HC stimulation, and electrode position relative to the target. Certain seizure types or syndromes may respond more favorably to specific targets, including ANT stimulation for deep temporal or limbic seizures, and CMT stimulation for generalized seizures and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.

SIGNIFICANCE

We have identified several patient, disease, and stimulation factors that potentially predict seizure outcome following DBS. More large-scale clinical trials are needed to explore different stimulation parameters, reevaluate the indications for DBS, and identify robust predictors of patient response.

Neurostimulation as a promising epilepsy therapy

The revolution in theory, swift technological developments, and invention of new devices have driven tremendous progress in neurostimulation as a third‐line treatment for epilepsy. Over the past decades, neurostimulation took its place in the field of epilepsy as an advanced treatment technique and opened up a new world. Numerous animal studies have proven the physical efficacy of stimulation of the brain and peripheral nerves. Based on this optimistic fundamental research, new advanced techniques are being explored in clinical practice. Over the past century, drawing on the benefits brought about by vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of epilepsy, various new neurostimulation modalities have been developed to control seizures. Clinical studies including case reports, case series, and clinical trials have been booming in the past several years. This article gives a comprehensive review of most of these clinical studies. In addition to highlighting the advantages of neurostimulation for the treatment of epilepsy, concerns with this modality and future development directions are also discussed. The biggest advantage of neurostimulation over pharmacological treatments for epilepsy is the modulation of the epilepsy network by delivering stimuli at a specific target or the “hub.” Conversely, however, a lack of knowledge of epilepsy networks and the mechanisms of neurostimulation may hinder further development. Therefore, theoretical research on the mechanism of epileptogenesis and epilepsy networks is needed in the future. Within the multiple modalities of neuromodulation, the final choice should be made after full discussion with a multidisciplinary team at a presurgical conference. Furthermore, the establishment of a neurostimulation system with standardized parameters and rigorous guidelines is another important issue. To achieve this goal, a worldwide collaboration of epilepsy centers is also suggested in the future.

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.

Emerging surgical therapies in the treatment of pediatric epilepsy

In the approximately 1% of children affected by epilepsy, pharmacoresistance and early age of seizure onset are strongly correlated with poor cognitive outcomes, depression, anxiety, developmental delay, and impaired activities of daily living. These children often require multiple surgical procedures, including invasive diagnostic procedures with intracranial electrodes to identify the seizure-onset zone. The recent development of minimally invasive surgical techniques, including stereotactic electroencephalography (SEEG) and MRI-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT), and new applications of neurostimulation, such as responsive neurostimulation (RNS), are quickly changing the landscape of the surgical management of pediatric epilepsy. In this review, the authors discuss these various technologies, their current applications, and limitations in the treatment of pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy, as well as areas for future research. The development of minimally invasive diagnostic and ablative surgical techniques together with new paradigms in neurostimulation hold vast potential to improve the efficacy and reduce the morbidity of the surgical management of children with drug-resistant epilepsy.

Current perspectives on deep brain stimulation for severe neurological and psychiatric disorders

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has become a well-accepted therapy to treat movement disorders, including Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, and dystonia. Long-term follow-up studies have demonstrated sustained improvement in motor symptoms and quality of life. DBS offers the opportunity to selectively modulate the targeted brain regions and related networks. Moreover, stimulation can be adjusted according to individual patients' demands, and stimulation is reversible. This has led to the introduction of DBS as a treatment for further neurological and psychiatric disorders and many clinical studies investigating the efficacy of stimulating various brain regions in order to alleviate severe neurological or psychiatric disorders including epilepsy, major depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. In this review, we provide an overview of accepted and experimental indications for DBS therapy and the corresponding anatomical targets.

Effect of subthalamic nucleus stimulation on penicillin induced focal motor seizures in primate

BACKGROUND

Drug-resistant motor epilepsies are particularly incapacitating for the patients. In a primate model of focal motor seizures induced by intracortical injection of penicillin, we recently showed that seizures propagated from the motor cortex towards the basal ganglia.

OBJECTIVE

Using the same animal model here, we hypothesized that disruption of subthalamic nucleus (STN) activity by chronic high frequency stimulation (HFS) could modify pathological excessive cortical synchronisation occurring during focal motor seizures, and therefore could reduce seizure activity.

METHODS

Two monkeys were chronically implanted with one electrode positioned into the STN. In each experiment, seizures were induced during 6 hours by injecting penicillin into the motor cortex. During stimulation sessions, HFS-STN was applied at the beginning of penicillin injection.

RESULTS

Our results indicate that HFS-STN improved focal motor seizures by delaying the occurrence of the first seizure, by decreasing the number of seizures by 47% and therefore the total time spent seizing by 53% compared to control. These results argue for a therapeutic use of HFS-STN in motor seizures because they were obtained in a very severe primate model of motor status similar to that seen in human. Furthermore, HFS-STN was much more efficient than direct cortical HFS of the epileptic focus, which we already tested in the same primate model.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that HFS-STN could be used as an experimental therapy when other therapeutic strategies are not possible or have failed in humans suffering from motor epilepsy but the present study still warrants controlled studies in humans.

Deep brain stimulation for the treatment of epilepsy: circuits, targets, and trials

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has proven remarkably safe and effective in the treatment of movement disorders. As a result, it is being increasingly applied to a range of neurologic and psychiatric disorders, including medically refractory epilepsy. This review will examine the use of DBS in epilepsy, including known targets, mechanisms of neuromodulation and seizure control, published clinical evidence, and novel technologies. Cortical and deep neuromodulation for epilepsy has a long experimental history, but only recently have better understanding of epileptogenic networks, precise stereotactic techniques, and rigorous trial design combined to improve the quality of available evidence and make DBS a viable treatment option. Nonetheless, underlying mechanisms, anatomical targets, and stimulation parameters remain areas of active investigation.

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.

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.

Deep brain stimulation for epilepsy

Deep brain stimulation for seizures has been applied to cerebellum, caudate, locus coeruleus, subthalamic nucleus, mammillary bodies, centromedian thalamus, anterior nucleus of thalamus, hippocampus and amygdala, hippocampal commissure, corpus callosum, neocortex, and occasionally to other sites. Animal and clinical studies have primarily investigated seizure prevention and, to a lessersmaller extent, seizure interruption. No studies have yet shown stimulation able to cure epilepsy. A wide variety of stimulation parameters have been employed in multiple different combinations of frequencies, amplitudes, and durations. Literature review identifies at least 52 clinical studies of brain stimulation for epilepsy in 817 patients. Two studies were large, randomized, and controlled, one in the anterior nucleus of thalamus and another at the cortical or hippocampal seizure focus; both of these studies showed efficacy and tolerability of stimulation. Many questions remain. We do not know the mechanisms, the best stimulation parameters, the best patient population, or how to predict benefit in advance. We do not know why benefit of neurostimulation for epilepsy seems to increase over time or whether there are long-term deleterious effects. All of these questions may be answerable with a combination of laboratory research and clinical experience.

Validation and perspectives of neuromodulation in Japan

Neuromodulation in functional neurosurgery is closely related to the development and availability of devices such as implantable electric stimulators and pumps. All such devices used in Japan are developed and made in foreign countries, and no made-in-Japan device exists. Introduction and approval by the government took many years for most devices, during which time many patients had to continue to live in our medically conservative country. The history of neuromodulation is summarized in Japan and the problems surrounding neuromodulation pointed out. Everyone has to aware of such circumstances and make every effort to improve the internationally unusual situation of neuromodulation in Japan. Otherwise, Japan will become a medically isolated country in the near future.