1
|
Samanta D, Aungaroon G, Albert GW, Karakas C, Joshi CN, Singh RK, Oluigbo C, Perry MS, Naik S, Reeders PC, Jain P, Abel TJ, Pati S, Shaikhouni A, Haneef Z. Advancing thalamic neuromodulation in epilepsy: Bridging adult data to pediatric care. Epilepsy Res 2024; 205:107407. [PMID: 38996686 DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2024.107407] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2024] [Revised: 06/27/2024] [Accepted: 07/01/2024] [Indexed: 07/14/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Debopam Samanta
- Division of Child Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
| | - Gewalin Aungaroon
- Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, Division of Neurology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Gregory W Albert
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, USA
| | - Cemal Karakas
- Division of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Neurology, Norton Children's Hospital, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA
| | - Charuta N Joshi
- Division of Pediatric Neurology, Childrens Medical Center Dallas, UTSW, USA
| | - Rani K Singh
- Department of Pediatrics, Atrium Health-Levine Children's; Wake Forest University School of Medicine, USA
| | - Chima Oluigbo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Children's National Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - M Scott Perry
- Jane and John Justin Institute for Mind Health, Cook Children's Medical Center, Ft Worth, TX, USA
| | - Sunil Naik
- Department of Pediatrics and Neurology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA 17033, USA
| | - Puck C Reeders
- Brain Institute, Nicklaus Children's Hospital, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Puneet Jain
- Epilepsy Program, Division of Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Taylor J Abel
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh
| | - Sandipan Pati
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, USA
| | - Ammar Shaikhouni
- Department of Pediatric Neurosurgery, Nationwide Children's Hospital, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Zulfi Haneef
- Neurology Care Line, VA Medical Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Fisher RS. Deep brain stimulation of thalamus for epilepsy. Neurobiol Dis 2023; 179:106045. [PMID: 36809846 DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2023.106045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2022] [Revised: 02/10/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert S Fisher
- Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences and Neurosurgery by Courtesy, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, 213 Quarry Road, Room 4865, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gadot R, Korst G, Shofty B, Gavvala JR, Sheth SA. Thalamic stereoelectroencephalography in epilepsy surgery: a scoping literature review. J Neurosurg 2022; 137:1210-1225. [PMID: 35276641 DOI: 10.3171/2022.1.jns212613] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2021] [Accepted: 01/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) is a well-established surgical method for defining the epileptogenic network. Traditionally reserved for identifying discrete cortical regions for resection or ablation, sEEG in current practice is also used for identifying more broadly involved subcortical epileptic network components, driven by the availability of brain-based neuromodulation strategies. In particular, sEEG investigations including thalamic nuclei are becoming more frequent in parallel with the increase in therapeutic strategies involving thalamic targets such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS). The objective to this study was to evaluate existing evidence and trends regarding the purpose, techniques, and relevant electrographic findings of thalamic sEEG. METHODS MEDLINE and Embase databases were systematically queried for eligible peer-reviewed studies involving sEEG electrode implantation into thalamic nuclei of patients with epilepsy. Available data were abstracted concerning preoperative workup and purpose for implanting the thalamus, thalamic targets and trajectories, and electrophysiological methodology and findings. RESULTS sEEG investigations have included thalamic targets for both basic and clinical research purposes. Medial pulvinar, dorsomedial, anterior, and centromedian nuclei have been the most frequently studied. Few studies have reported any complications with thalamic sEEG implantation, and no studies have reported long-term complications. Various methods have been utilized to characterize thalamic activity in epileptic disorders including evoked potentials, power spectrograms, synchronization indices, and the epileptogenicity index. Thalamic intracranial recordings are beginning to be used to guide neuromodulation strategies including RNS and DBS, as well as to understand complex, network-dependent seizure disorders. CONCLUSIONS Inclusion of thalamic coverage during sEEG evaluation in drug-resistant epilepsy is a growing practice and is amenable to various methods of electrographic data analysis. Further study is required to establish well-defined criteria for thalamic implantation during invasive investigations as well as safety and ethical considerations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Jay R Gavvala
- 2Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Xue T, Chen S, Bai Y, Han C, Yang A, Zhang J. Neuromodulation in drug-resistant epilepsy: A review of current knowledge. Acta Neurol Scand 2022; 146:786-797. [PMID: 36063433 DOI: 10.1111/ane.13696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Nearly 1% of the global population suffers from epilepsy. Drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) affects one-third of epileptic patients who are unable to treat their condition with existing drugs. For the treatment of DRE, neuromodulation offers a lot of potential. The background, mechanism, indication, application, efficacy, and safety of each technique are briefly described in this narrative review, with an emphasis on three approved neuromodulation therapies: vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT-DBS), and closed-loop responsive neurostimulation (RNS). Neuromodulatory approaches involving direct or induced electrical currents have been developed to lessen seizure frequency and duration in patients with DRE since the notion of electrical stimulation as a therapy for neurologic diseases originated in the early nineteenth century. Although few people have attained total seizure independence for more than 12 months using these treatments, more than half have benefitted from a 50% drop in seizure frequency over time. Although promising outcomes in adults and children with DRE have been achieved, challenges such as heterogeneity among epilepsy types and etiologies, optimization of stimulation parameters, a lack of biomarkers to predict response to neuromodulation therapies, high-level evidence to aid decision-making, and direct comparisons between neuromodulatory approaches remain. To solve these existing gaps, authorize new kinds of neuromodulation, and develop personalized closed-loop treatments, further research is needed. Finally, both invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation seems to be safe. Implantation-related adverse events for invasive stimulation primarily include infection and pain at the implant site. Intracranial hemorrhage is a frequent adverse event for DBS and RNS. Other stimulation-specific side-effects are mild with non-invasive stimulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tao Xue
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Shujun Chen
- Department of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Yutong Bai
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Chunlei Han
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Anchao Yang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Jianguo Zhang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bigelow MD, Kouzani AZ. Neural stimulation systems for the control of refractory epilepsy: a review. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2019; 16:126. [PMID: 31665058 PMCID: PMC6820988 DOI: 10.1186/s12984-019-0605-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Epilepsy affects nearly 1% of the world's population. A third of epilepsy patients suffer from a kind of epilepsy that cannot be controlled by current medications. For those where surgery is not an option, neurostimulation may be the only alternative to bring relief, improve quality of life, and avoid secondary injury to these patients. Until recently, open loop neurostimulation was the only alternative for these patients. However, for those whose epilepsy is applicable, the medical approval of the responsive neural stimulation and the closed loop vagal nerve stimulation systems have been a step forward in the battle against uncontrolled epilepsy. Nonetheless, improvements can be made to the existing systems and alternative systems can be developed to further improve the quality of life of sufferers of the debilitating condition. In this paper, we first present a brief overview of epilepsy as a disease. Next, we look at the current state of biomarker research in respect to sensing and predicting epileptic seizures. Then, we present the current state of open loop neural stimulation systems. We follow this by investigating the currently approved, and some of the recent experimental, closed loop systems documented in the literature. Finally, we provide discussions on the current state of neural stimulation systems for controlling epilepsy, and directions for future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew D Bigelow
- School of Engineering, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, 3216, Australia
| | - Abbas Z Kouzani
- School of Engineering, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, 3216, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|