Miller, Kai J.

OBJECTIVE Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is emerging as an additional surgical option for refractory, multifocal epilepsy. Four-lead DBS systems can be used when seizure onset is poorly localized, generalized, or involves multiple targetable circuits. The goal of this study was to assess preliminary outcomes and complication rates in 4-lead DBS systems for treating epilepsy. METHODS A consecutive series of 32 patients with 4-lead DBS implants who had at least 6 months of follow-up was reviewed, and demographics, outcomes, and complications were abstracted. RESULTS Thirty-two patients implanted with 4 DBS leads (including off-label use) were included. The median age at surgery was 28.5 years, the median age at epilepsy diagnosis was 7.5 years, and 18 patients (56%) were women. The median epilepsy duration prior to implantation was 21 years. The most common seizure localization was frontotemporal (53%), followed by generalized (28%) and parietoccipital (13%). Prior vagus nerve stimulation had been trialed in 20 patients (63%), and an invasive stereotactic EEG recording was performed in 17 patients (59%). Eight patients had prior epilepsy surgery (25%). DBS targets included the anterior thalamic nucleus in combination with the centromedian thalamic nucleus, hippocampus, pulvinar nucleus, cingulate, insula, and globus pallidus. The median surgical duration was 5 hours 22 minutes, with a median operating room time of 8 hours 21 minutes. The median postoperative follow-up was 27 (interquartile range 17–41) months. Three patients experienced transient neurological deficits and 2 patients required intraoperative lead repositioning. There were no infections or hemorrhages. Most patients benefited from stimulation (22% Engel class I, 22% class II, 28% class III, and 28% class IV). The median patient-reported seizure reduction rate was 70%, with a responder rate of 72%. One patient elected to have the system explanted. CONCLUSIONS Four-lead DBS is safe and can achieve meaningful improvement in challenging cases of multifocal epilepsy with a low complication rate.

Miller et al. maintain that thalamic SEEG can now be considered a cornerstone of standard clinical practice in individualized epilepsy care, helping to define seizure onset and spread, assess therapeutic stimulation, map connectivity, and identify target-specific biomarkers for responsive neurostimulation.

Abstract Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus improves motor symptoms in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Using functional MRI, optimal DBS response networks have been characterized. However, neural activity associated with Parkinsonian symptoms is magnitudes faster than what can be resolved by this method. Although both spatial and temporal domains of these networks appear crucial, no single study has yet investigated both domains simultaneously. Here, we aimed at closing this gap by analysing electrophysiological data from a total of n = 127 hemispheres. Using subthalamic local field potentials that were recorded concurrently alongside whole-brain magnetoencephalography in a multi-centre cohort of patients who underwent subthalamic DBS for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease (n = 100 hemispheres), we analysed the DBS response network in both spatial and temporal domains. In every cortical vertex, cortico-subthalamic coupling was correlated with stimulation outcomes. This network spatially resembled functional MRI-based findings (R = 0.40, P = 0.039) and explained significant amounts of variance in clinical outcomes (βstd = 0.30, P = 0.002), whereas theta–alpha and low beta coupling did not show significant associations with DBS response (theta–alpha: βstd = −0.02, P = 0.805; low beta: βstd = −0.08, P = 0.426). The ‘optimal’ high beta coupling map was robust when subjected to various cross-validation designs (10-fold cross-validation: R = 0.29, P = 0.009; split-half design: R = 0.31, P = 0.026) and was able to predict outcomes across DBS centres [R = 0.74; P(1) = 8.9 × 10−5]. We identified a DBS response network that resembles the previously defined MRI network and operates in the high beta band. Maximal connectivity to this network was associated with optimal DBS outcomes and was able to cross-predict clinical improvements across DBS surgeons and centres.

Objective The effects of deep brain stimulation (DBS) manifest across multiple timescales, spanning seconds to months, and involve direct electrical effects, neuroplasticity, and network reorganization. In epilepsy, the delayed impact of DBS on seizures presents challenges for optimization. Single‐pulse stimulation and resulting brain stimulation evoked potentials (BSEPs) provide a means to assess effective connectivity and network excitability. This study integrates BSEPs and short trials of DBS during stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) to map seizure network engagement, modulate network dynamics, and monitor excitability and interictal abnormalities for biomarker informed neuromodulation. Methods Ten individuals with drug resistant epilepsy undergoing clinical sEEG were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study of epilepsy neuromodulation biomarkers. Each patient underwent a trial of high frequency (145Hz) thalamic DBS. BSEPs were acquired before and after DBS trials. Baseline BSEP amplitude assessed seizure network engagement, and modulation of amplitude (pre vs post DBS) assessed change in network excitability. Interictal epileptiform discharges were tracked by an automated classifier. Results Baseline BSEPs delineated distinct patterns of network engagement between thalamic subfields with maximal frontotemporal engagement achieved with stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus‐ventral anterior nucleus junction. DBS delivered for >1.5 hours reduced BSEP amplitudes compared to baseline, and the degree of modulation correlated with baseline connectivity strength. Shorter DBS trials did not induce reliable BSEP amplitude suppression, but did immediately suppress interictal epileptiform discharge rates in well‐connected seizure networks. Interpretation BSEPs and trials of DBS during sEEG provide novel network biomarkers to evaluate the modulation of large‐scale networks across multiple timescales, advancing biomarker informed neuromodulation. ANN NEUROL 2026;99:748–760

Background: Tremor in multiple sclerosis (MS) is often refractory to medications. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) may help, but possible side effects and disease exacerbation limit its use. Objectives: Evaluate outcomes of DBS for MS-associated tremor. Methods: Retrospective review of 18 patients with MS-associated tremor who underwent DBS, analyzing Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Fahn–Tolosa–Marin (FTM) tremor scores. Results: Median age at surgery was 49.5 years (range, 28–75), with postoperative follow-up 2.5 years (range, 0–22). No relapses (0/18) or new lesions (0/8) occurred postoperatively. All had ventral intermediate nucleus leads; other targets were not used in programming. EDSS remained stable (median 6 to 6.25; p = 0.2). FTM scores improved (median 14.5 to 10, p = 0.008). Patients with EDSS 3.5–6 had variable outcomes ( p = 0.02). Conclusions: DBS is a potential treatment for severe MS tremor and did not provoke relapse. Targeting VIM alone may optimize tremor control and maintain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) access.