Singh, Raunak

Abstract To characterize invasive neuromodulation for insular drug‐resistant epilepsy, we retrospectively evaluated 22 patients treated with responsive neurostimulation (RNS; n = 14) or chronic subthreshold stimulation (CSS; n = 8). Stereoelectroencephalography was performed in 20 cases (91%). Median baseline seizure frequency was 10.5/month. Forty‐one percent had prior epilepsy surgery. At year 3, median seizure reduction (MSR) was 83% ( p = .01, Wilcoxon signed‐rank test), with a responder rate (RR) of 77%; MSR was 92% for CSS and 75% for RNS. There were no significant differences in MSR ( p ≥ .4) or RR ( p > .9) when comparing RNS versus CSS. Three patients achieved seizure freedom by year 3. Patients undergoing combined insular–thalamic stimulation ( n = 5) demonstrated an MSR of 84%, 86%, and 88% at 1, 2, and 3 years; seizure reduction in thalamocortical versus cortical‐only stimulation was not different ( p ≥ .1). Parasagittal lead trajectories achieved closer insular proximity than transopercular trajectories ( p < .0001, Mann–Whitney U ‐test). Median charge density at last follow‐up was 1.3 μC/cm 2 . There were no acute surgical complications and all stimulation‐related side effects resolved with programming adjustments. This study expands the limited literature on insular neuromodulation by demonstrating effectiveness of RNS and CSS, suggesting potential benefit from combined thalamocortical targeting, and defining parasagittal trajectories as a surgical approach for optimal lead proximity.

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.