Novel Use of Responsive Neurostimulation (RNS System) in the Treatment of Super Refractory Status Epilepticus

Dual Treatment of Refractory Focal Epilepsy and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder With Intracranial Responsive Neurostimulation

Purpose of the Review

Intracranial neurostimulation is a well-established treatment of neurologic conditions such as drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) and movement disorders, and there is emerging evidence for using deep brain stimulation to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and depression. Nearly all published reports of intracranial neurostimulation have focused on implanting a single device to treat a single condition. The purpose of this review was to educate neurology clinicians on the background literature informing dual treatment of 2 comorbid neuropsychiatric conditions epilepsy and OCD, discuss ethical and logistical challenges to dual neuropsychiatric treatment with a single device, and demonstrate the promise and pitfalls of this approach through discussion of the first-in-human closed-looped responsive neurostimulator (RNS) implanted to treat both DRE (on-label) and OCD (off-label).

Recent Findings

We report the first implantation of an intracranial closed-loop neurostimulation device (the RNS system) with the primary goal of treating DRE and a secondary exploratory goal of managing treatment-refractory OCD. The RNS system detects electrophysiologic activity and delivers electrical stimulation through 1 or 2 electrodes implanted into a patient's seizure-onset zones (SOZs). In this case report, we describe a patient with treatment-refractory epilepsy and OCD where the first lead was implanted in the right superior temporal gyrus to target the most active SOZ based on stereotactic EEG (sEEG) recordings and semiology. The second lead was implanted to target the right anterior peri-insular region (a secondary SOZ on sEEG) with the distal-most contacts in the right nucleus accumbens, a putative target for OCD neurostimulation treatment. The RNS system was programmed to detect and record the unique electrophysiologic signature of both the patient's seizures and compulsions and then deliver tailored electrical pulses to disrupt the pathologic circuitry.

Summary

Dual treatment of refractory focal epilepsy and OCD with an intracranial closed-loop neurostimulation device is feasible, safe, and potentially effective. However, there are logistical challenges and ethical considerations to this novel approach to treatment, which require complex care coordination by a large multidisciplinary team.

Responsive neurostimulation as a therapy for epilepsy following new-onset refractory status epilepticus: Case series and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To report clinical outcomes of patients who presented with new-onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE), developed drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), and were treated with responsive neurostimulation (RNS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients implanted with RNS at our institution and identified three who originally presented with NORSE. Through chart review, we retrieved objective and subjective information related to their presentation, workup, and outcomes including patient-reported seizure frequency. We reviewed electrocorticography (ECoG) data to estimate seizure burden at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months following RNS implantation. We performed a review of literature concerning neurostimulation in NORSE.

RESULTS

Use of RNS to treat DRE following NORSE was associated with reduced seizure burden and informed care by differentiating epileptic from non-epileptic events.

CONCLUSIONS

Our single-center experience of three cases suggests that RNS is a safe and potentially effective treatment for DRE following NORSE.

SIGNIFICANCE

This article reports outcomes of the largest case series of NORSE patients treated with RNS. Since patients with NORSE are at high risk of adverse neuropsychiatric and cognitive sequelae beyond seizures, a unique strength of RNS over other surgical options is the ability to distinguish ictal or peri-ictal from non-epileptic events.

Surgical management of status epilepticus: A systematic review

Status Epilepticus (SE), unresponsive to medical management, is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Surgical management is typically considered in these refractory cases. The best surgical approach for affected patients remains unclear; however, given the lack of controlled trials exploring the role of surgery. We performed a systematic review according to PRIMSA guidelines, including case reports and series describing surgical interventions for patients in SE. Cases (157 patients, median age 12.9 years) were followed for a median of 12 months. Patients were in SE for a median of 21 days before undergoing procedures including: focal resection (36.9%), functional hemispherectomy (21%), lobar resection (12.7%), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) (12.7%), deep brain stimulation (DBS) (6.4%), multiple subpial transection (MST) (3.8%), responsive neurostimulation (RNS) (1.9%), and cortical stimulator placement (1.27%), with 24 patients undergoing multiple procedures. Multiple SE semiologies were identified. 47.8% of patients had focal seizures, and 65% of patients had focal structural abnormalities on MRI. SE persisted for 36.8 ± 47.7 days prior to surgical intervention. SE terminated following surgery in 81.5%, terminated with additional adjuncts in 10.2%, continued in 1.9%, and was not specified in 6.4% of patients. Long-term seizure outcomes were favorable, with the majority improved and 51% seizure-free. Eight patients passed away in follow-up, of which three were in SE. Seizures emerging from one hemisphere were both more likely to immediately terminate (OR 4.7) and lead to long-term seizure-free status (OR 3.9) compared to nonunilateral seizures. No other predictors, including seizure focality, SE duration, or choice of surgical procedure, were predictors of SE termination. Surgical treatment of SE can be effective in terminating SE and leading to sustained seizure freedom, with many different procedures showing efficacy if matched appropriately with SE semiology and etiology. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patients with persistent seizures (Status Epilepticus) that do not stop following medications can be treated effectively with surgery. Here, we systematically review the entirety of existing literature on surgery for treating status epilepticus to better identify how and when surgery is used and what patients do after surgery.

Neuromodulation Techniques in Children with Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus

Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening condition and medical emergency which can have lifelong consequences, including neuronal death and alteration of neuronal networks, resulting in long-term neurologic and cognitive deficits in children. When standard pharmacological treatment for SE is not successful in controlling seizures, the condition evolves to refractory SE (rSE) and finally to super-refractory SE (srSE) if it exceeds 24 h despite using anaesthetics. In this systematic review, we present literature data on the potential uses of clinical neuromodulation techniques for the management of srSE in children, including electroconvulsive therapy, vagus nerve stimulation, and deep brain stimulation. The evaluation of these techniques is limited by the small number of published paediatric cases (n = 25, one with two techniques) in peer-reviewed articles (n = 18). Although neuromodulation strategies have not been tested through randomised, prospective controlled clinical trials, this review presents the existing data and the potential benefits of neuromodulation therapy, suggesting that these techniques, when available, could be considered at earlier stages within the course of srSE intending to prevent long-term neurologic complications. Clinical trials aiming to establish whether early intervention can prevent long-term sequelae are necessary in order to establish the potential clinical value of neuromodulation techniques for the treatment of srSE in children.

Combined Responsive Neurostimulation and Focal Resection for Super Refractory Status Epilepticus: A Systematic Review and Illustrative Case Report

OBJECTIVE

Super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE) is a neurologic emergency with high mortality and morbidity. Although medical algorithms typically are effective, when they do fail, options may be limited, and neurosurgical intervention should be considered.

METHODS

We report a case of SRSE treated acutely with responsive neurostimulation (RNS) and focal surgical resection after intracranial monitoring. We also conducted a systematic review of the literature for neurosurgical treatment of SRSE (e.g., neurostimulation). Only published manuscripts were considered.

RESULTS

Our patient's seizure semiology consisted of left facial twitching with frequent evolution to bilateral tonic-clonic convulsions. Stereoelectroencephalography and grid monitoring identified multiple seizure foci. The patient underwent right RNS placement with cortical strip leads over the lateral primary motor and premotor cortex as well as simultaneous right superior temporal and frontopolar resection. Status epilepticus resolved 21 days after surgical resection and placement of the RNS. The systematic review revealed 15 case reports describing 17 patients with SRSE who underwent acute neurosurgical intervention. There were 3 patients with SRSE with RNS placement as a single modality, all of whom experienced cessation of SE. Four patients with SRSE received vagus nerve stimulation (3 as a single modality and 1 with combined corpus callosotomy), of whom 1 had SE recurrence at 2weeks. Two patients with SRSE received deep brain stimulation, and the remaining 8 underwent surgical resection; none had recurrence of SE.

CONCLUSIONS

RNS System placement with or without resection can be a viable treatment option for select patients with SRSE. Early neurosurgical intervention may improve seizure outcomes and reduce complications.

Vagus nerve stimulation for focal seizures

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review published in 2015. Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder, characterised by recurring, unprovoked seizures. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a neuromodulatory treatment that is used as an adjunctive therapy for treating people with drug-resistant epilepsy. VNS consists of chronic, intermittent electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve, delivered by a programmable pulse generator.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of VNS when used as add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS), and MEDLINE Ovid on 3 March 2022. We imposed no language restrictions. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered parallel or cross-over, randomised, double-blind, controlled trials of VNS as add-on treatment, which compared high- and low-level stimulation (including three different stimulation paradigms: rapid, mild, and slow duty-cycle), and VNS stimulation versus no stimulation, or a different intervention. We considered adults or children with drug-resistant focal seizures who were either not eligible for surgery, or who had failed surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods, assessing the following outcomes: 1. 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency 2. Treatment withdrawal (any reason) 3. Adverse effects 4. Quality of life (QoL) 5. Cognition 6. Mood

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any new studies for this update, therefore, the conclusions are unchanged. We included the five randomised controlled trials (RCT) from the last update, with a total of 439 participants. The baseline phase ranged from 4 to 12 weeks, and double-blind treatment phases from 12 to 20 weeks. We rated two studies at an overall low risk of bias, and three at an overall unclear risk of bias, due to lack of reported information about study design. Effective blinding of studies of VNS is difficult, due to the frequency of stimulation-related side effects, such as voice alteration. The risk ratio (RR) for 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency was 1.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 2.64; 4 RCTs, 373 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), showing that high frequency VNS was over one and a half times more effective than low frequency VNS. The RR for treatment withdrawal was 2.56 (95% CI 0.51 to 12.71; 4 RCTs, 375 participants; low-certainty evidence). Results for the top five reported adverse events were: hoarseness RR 2.17 (99% CI 1.49 to 3.17; 3 RCTs, 330 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); cough RR 1.09 (99% CI 0.74 to 1.62; 3 RCTs, 334 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); dyspnoea RR 2.45 (99% CI 1.07 to 5.60; 3 RCTs, 312 participants; low-certainty evidence); pain RR 1.01 (99% CI 0.60 to 1.68; 2 RCTs; 312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); paraesthesia 0.78 (99% CI 0.39 to 1.53; 2 RCTs, 312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Results from two studies (312 participants) showed that a small number of favourable QOL effects were associated with VNS stimulation, but results were inconclusive between high- and low-level stimulation groups. One study (198 participants) found inconclusive results between high- and low-level stimulation for cognition on all measures used. One study (114 participants) found the majority of participants showed an improvement in mood on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale compared to baseline, but results between high- and low-level stimulation were inconclusive. We found no important heterogeneity between studies for any of the outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

VNS for focal seizures appears to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment. Results of the overall efficacy analysis show that high-level stimulation reduced the frequency of seizures better than low-level stimulation. There were very few withdrawals, which suggests that VNS is well tolerated. Adverse effects associated with implantation and stimulation were primarily hoarseness, cough, dyspnoea, pain, paraesthesia, nausea, and headache, with hoarseness and dyspnoea more likely to occur with high-level stimulation than low-level stimulation. However, the evidence for these outcomes is limited, and of moderate to low certainty. Further high-quality research is needed to fully evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of VNS for drug-resistant focal seizures.

Future Opportunities for Research in Rescue Treatments

Clinical studies of rescue medications for seizure clusters are limited and are designed to satisfy regulatory requirements, which may not fully consider the needs of the diverse patient population that experiences seizure clusters or utilize rescue medication. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine the factors that contribute to, or may influence the quality of, seizure cluster research with a goal of improving clinical practice. We address five areas of unmet needs and provide advice for how they could enhance future trials of seizure cluster treatments. The topics addressed in this article are: (1) unaddressed end points to pursue in future studies, (2) roles for devices to enhance rescue medication clinical development programs, (3) tools to study seizure cluster prediction and prevention, (4) the value of other designs for seizure cluster studies, and (5) unique challenges of future trial paradigms for seizure clusters. By focusing on novel end points and technologies with value to patients, caregivers, and clinicians, data obtained from future studies can benefit the diverse patient population that experiences seizure clusters, providing more effective, appropriate care as well as alleviating demands on health care resources.

Neuromodulation for Refractory Epilepsy

Three neuromodulation therapies, all using implanted device and electrodes, have been approved to treat adults with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, namely, the vagus nerve stimulation in 1995, deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT-DBS) in 2018 (2010 in Europe), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) in 2014. Indications for VNS have more recently extended to children down to age of 4. Limited or anecdotal data are available in other epilepsy syndromes and refractory/super-refractory status epilepticus. Overall, neuromodulation therapies are palliative, with only a minority of patients achieving long-term seizure freedom, justifying favoring such treatments in patients who are not good candidates for curative epilepsy surgery. About half of patients implanted with VNS, ANT-DBS, and RNS have 50% or greater reduction in seizures, with long-term data suggesting increased efficacy over time. Besides their impact on seizure frequency, neuromodulation therapies are associated with various benefits and drawbacks in comparison to antiseizure drugs. Yet, we lack high-level evidence to best position each neuromodulation therapy in the treatment pathways of persons with difficult-to-treat epilepsy.

Deep brain stimulation of the centromedian thalamic nucleus for the treatment of FIRES

Febrile infection‐related epilepsy syndrome (FIRES) is a rare, life‐threatening complication of febrile illness in previously healthy individuals followed by super‐refractory status epilepticus. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been demonstrated to be a promising therapy for the treatment of intractable epilepsy. Here, we present a pediatric patient with FIRES whose seizures were mitigated by acute DBS of the bilateral centromedian thalamic nucleus (CMTN). This is a previously healthy 11‐year‐old female who presented emergently with altered mental status, fever, and malaise after 1 week of lethargy, anorexia, fever, and abdominal pain. The patient began having seizures shortly after admission. After thorough workup for encephalitis and other potential etiologies, this patient was diagnosed with FIRES due to super‐refractory status epilepticus. Status epilepticus persisted despite pharmacologic management, immunotherapy, and vagus nerve stimulation. DBS of the bilateral CMTN (CM‐DBS) was pursued after 56 days of hospitalization, and she demonstrated considerable improvement in baseline mental status 30 days after DBS insertion. This report highlights application of CM‐DBS for super‐refractory status epilepticus in FIRES. This region is a diffusely connected brain region and has been shown to modulate neural networks contributing to seizure propagation and consciousness; therefore, neurostimulation is a potential therapeutic intervention for patients with super‐refractory status epilepticus.

Chronic electroencephalography in epilepsy with a responsive neurostimulation device: current status and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

Implanted neurostimulation devices are gaining traction as therapeutic options for people with certain forms of drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Some of these devices enable chronic electroencephalography (cEEG), which offers views of the dynamics of brain activity in epilepsy over unprecedented time horizons.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on clinical insights and basic neuroscience discoveries enabled by analyses of cEEG from an exemplar device, the NeuroPace RNS® System. Applications of RNS cEEG covered here include counting and lateralizing seizures, quantifying medication response, characterizing spells, forecasting seizures, and exploring mechanisms of cognition. Limitations of the RNS System are discussed in the context of next-generation devices in development.

EXPERT OPINION

The wide temporal lens of cEEG helps capture the dynamism of epilepsy, revealing phenomena that cannot be appreciated with short duration recordings. The RNS System is a vanguard device whose diagnostic utility rivals its therapeutic benefits, but emerging minimally invasive devices, including those with subscalp recording electrodes, promise to be more applicable within a broad population of people with epilepsy. Epileptology is on the precipice of a paradigm shift in which cEEG is a standard part of diagnostic evaluations and clinical management is predicated on quantitative observations integrated over long timescales.

Responsive neurostimulation for focal motor status epilepticus

No clear evidence‐based treatment paradigm currently exists for refractory and super‐refractory status epilepticus, which can result in significant mortality and morbidity. While patients are typically treated with antiepileptic drugs and anesthetics, neurosurgical neuromodulation techniques can also be considered. We present a novel case in which responsive neurostimulation was used to effectively treat a patient who had developed super‐refractory status epilepticus, later consistent with epilepsia partialis continua, that was refractory to antiepileptic drugs, immunomodulatory therapies, and transcranial magnetic stimulation. This case demonstrates how regional therapy provided by responsive neurostimulation can be effective in treating super‐refractory status epilepticus through neuromodulation of seizure networks.

Neurostimulation in the treatment of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus

Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening condition with a mortality of up to 60% in the advanced and comatose forms of SE. In one out of five adults, first and second line fails to control epileptic activity, leading to refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and in around 3% to super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE), where SE continues despite anesthetic treatment for 24 h or more. In this rare but devastating condition, innovative and safe treatments are needed. In a recent review on the use of vagal nerve stimulation in RSE and SRSE, a 74% response rate for abrogation of SE was reported. Here, we review the currently available evidence supporting the use of neurostimulation, including vagal nerve stimulation, direct cortical stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, electroconvulsive therapy, and deep brain stimulation in RSE and SRSE. This article is part of the Special Issue "Proceedings of the 7th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures".