Lundstrom, Brian N.

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.

Abstract Objective Anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective therapy for frontotemporal and limbic drug‐resistant focal epilepsies. The pulvinar nucleus (PUL) is an emerging neuromodulation target for seizure networks involving the posterior quadrant and temporal lobe. This study evaluates the safety and effectiveness of combined bilateral ANT plus PUL DBS for posterior quadrant and temporal lobe epilepsies. Methods We conducted a single‐center retrospective cohort study of patients receiving combined ANT/PUL DBS between 2021 and 2025. Outcomes included median seizure rate reduction (MSR), responder rate (RR; >50% seizure frequency reduction), and stimulation‐related side effects, assessed across ANT, PUL, and concurrent ANT/PUL stimulation settings. Acute surgical complications were evaluated. Statistical significance was assessed using two‐sided Wilcoxon signed‐rank tests with Holm–Bonferroni correction. Results Nine patients with combined ANT/PUL DBS were identified, and eight patients had sufficient follow‐up for inclusion (median follow‐up = 20 months). Posterior predominant structural abnormalities were present in eight of nine patients. There were no acute surgical complications. Three instances of transient stimulation‐related side effects resolved with parameter adjustments, whereas one patient required rescue antiseizure medication in addition to programming changes. Eight patients received periods of ANT stimulation, six PUL stimulation, and seven combined ANT/PUL stimulation. Regarding overall outcome, at last follow‐up, there was a significant 80.8% MSR ( p = .0078) and 87.5% RR, with two patients receiving ANT and six ANT/PUL stimulation. Regarding target‐specific MSR, concurrent ANT/PUL DBS (68.8% MSR) showed a trend toward superior performance relative to ANT (43.3%) and PUL DBS (17.5%) alone, although subgroup analysis of target‐specific performance did not reach statistical significance. Significance Combined four‐lead ANT/PUL DBS appears safe and effective for patients with drug‐resistant posterior quadrant and temporal lobe epilepsies. Dual‐network neuromodulation may provide greater flexibility to individually optimize neuromodulation for complex seizure networks.

Objective Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a severe treatment‐resistant epilepsy. Although vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are established therapies, comparative data and the impact of dual neuromodulation remain limited. We compared seizure outcomes across VNS, DBS, and combined DBS + VNS therapy in LGS. Methods This retrospective cohort study at Mayo Clinic (2005–2024) included LGS patients treated with VNS and/or DBS . Seizure frequency was assessed at 6, 12, and 24 months post‐stimulation. Responder was defined as 50% or more seizure reduction. Results Forty patients were included (42% female, median, 150 seizures/month). Eleven patients underwent sequential VNS followed by DBS and contributed data to 2 treatment epochs, yielding 3 treatment groups: VNS alone (n = 29), DBS alone (n = 12), and DBS + VNS (n = 10). At 24 months, median seizure reduction rate was comparable between VNS (50%; 95% confidence interval [ CI], 44–75%) and the overall DBS cohort (59%, 95% CI, 33–86%) ( p = 0.54). However, a significant difference emerged when comparing the 3 treatment arms ( p = 0.027). Specifically, DBS + VNS therapy yielded significantly greater median reduction rate (81%, 95% CI, 60–99%) than DBS alone (43%, 95% CI, 0–58%) ( p adj = 0.027) or VNS alone (50%, 95% CI, 44.4–75.0%) ( p adj = 0.048). Four patients attained sustained seizure freedom above 1 year at last follow‐up. Interpretation VNS and DBS provide comparable seizure reduction in LGS over a 2‐year follow‐up period. DBS + VNS was associated with further improvements in seizure reduction in this small, retrospective dataset. This possibility warrants further investigation. ANN NEUROL 2026

Abstract Drug-resistant epilepsy affects tens of millions of people worldwide and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Thalamic deep brain stimulation and cortical responsive neurostimulation are proven treatments for focal epilepsy. Both have been used to target a range of thalamic nuclei; yet, the roles of these thalamic nuclei in focal seizure generation remain incompletely understood. Thirteen patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy undergoing intracranial EEG were consented to undergo investigation of thalamocortical networks. Sampled regions included cortical, mesial temporal, and thalamic brain regions. Visual and spectral analyses were performed to identify seizure onset patterns and correlate thalamic and cortical seizure activity. Thalamic ictal discharges were observed in 89% of seizures. Of these, 56% demonstrated synchronous thalamocortical activity with distinct patterns. These onset patterns included hypersynchronous spiking, low-voltage fast activity, ictal baseline shifts, and broadband suppression. Multiple thalamic nuclei were involved in ictal organization and propagation, with the specific nuclei depending on the cortical seizure network. The thalamus plays a crucial role in focal onset seizure generation and propagation, with distinct seizure onset patterns and nuclei involved. These findings support exploring a broader range of thalamic nuclei in epilepsy neurostimulation and have implications for seizure detection settings in intracranial sensing devices.

BACKGROUND Laser interstitial thermal therapy is a minimally invasive surgical technique commonly used for treating epileptogenic foci in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Densely calcified lesions pose a challenge because they prevent the placement of a laser cannula within them and act as a heat shield. A 22-year-old male presented with intractable epilepsy with imaging demonstrating a densely calcified lesion in the right medial occipitotemporal gyrus radiographically consistent with a polymorphous low-grade neuroepithelial tumor of the young. OBSERVATIONS Two laser cannulas were stereotactically positioned to flank the centrally calcified portion of the lesion at its anterior and posterior aspects. Intraoperative MR thermography during each ablation showed that the dense calcification shielded ablative heating from spreading to the other side of the lesion. The sum of the thermal ablation zones covered the entirety of the lesion. Postprocedure MRI demonstrated overlapping peripherally enhancing ablation zones, which subsumed the entirety of the calcified mass. The patient tolerated the procedure well and remained seizure free at the 14-month follow-up. LESSONS Using multiple stereotactically placed laser filaments to flank epileptogenic lesions that are densely calcified is a strategy to effectively encompass the entirety of the lesion within the combined ablation zones. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE26184

The brain is a highly recurrent, nonlinear network hypothesized to remain near the edge of chaos for optimal performance. Excitation and inhibition must be balanced precisely within every neuron to ensure a consistent level of dynamical stability and rich dynamics during transition to chaos. However, analysis of biologically realistic synaptic weight matrices suggests that sparsity and low-dimensional structure interact such that there is no known synaptic balancing rule that constrains the stability (i.e., eigenvalues) of the network while also preserving computationally useful, low-dimensional structure. Further, even if a network were well-balanced, external stimuli interact with the nonlinear activation functions to unbalance the network in real time. Therefore, the brain must utilize dynamic, rather than static, mechanisms to actively regulate its level of stability. We propose that two specific adaptation mechanisms, spike frequency adaptation (SFA) and short-term synaptic depression (STD), continuously modulate the effective connectivity, keeping the brain near the edge of chaos and reducing dynamical fluctuations caused by stimuli. This theoretical framework links intrinsic and synaptic negative feedback mechanisms to network-level dynamics. This offers an explanation of why data-driven modeling of human brain signals, an exciting and useful method in epilepsy and anesthesiology research, seems to require linear time-varying (LTV) models which are refit every half second: difficult to observe adaptation processes interact with nonlinearities to make connectivity effectively dynamic at the macroelectrode scale. We suggest that compromised adaptation may underlie neurological conditions characterized by altered excitability, and that targeted brain stimulation could be used to probe the regulatory action of adaptation.

Abstract Neuromodulation is approved for the treatment of drug‐resistant epilepsy. It has been increasingly utilized over the past two decades with the approval of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) in addition to vagus nerve stimulation (VNS)—particularly in patients who are not deemed to be good resective surgical candidates or in case of patient preference. In this seminar in epileptology article, we address learning objective 3.7 “Demonstrate knowledge of indications, limitations and risks for vagal nerve stimulation and other neuromodulation techniques” of the International League Against Epilepsy curriculum for epileptologists. We will review the indications for neuromodulation, device programming, surgical considerations for implantation, side effects, effects on sleep, and mood. This is complemented by case examples that provide perspective for trainees, along with an outlook on future directions for neuromodulation in epilepsy. This article aims to serve as a learning resource for trainees in neurology, clinical neurophysiology, and epileptology by providing guidance in how to navigate the landscape of neuromodulation in epilepsy.

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.

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