DOI 10.1080/00207454.2020.1713777
Can we predict response to vagus nerve stimulation in intractable epilepsy.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Since vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A number of studies show that VNS was effective to reduce seizure frequency. However, there was still some patients treated with VNS having poor or even no clinical effect.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the present review was to identify factors predicting the effect of VNS therapy and to select patients suitable for VNS treatment.
METHOD: PubMed and Medline was searched with this terms "epilepsy," "vagus nerve stimulation," "vagal nerve stimulation," "VNS," "intractable," and "refractory".We selected studies by predefining inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS
the effectiveness of VNA was confirmed by a number of studies. We find many studies exploring the predictive factors to VNS. However there was no any study finding factors correlating clearly with the outcome of VNS. Although, we find these factors, such as post-traumatic epilepsy, temporal lobe epilepsy and focal interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs), were favorable for the treatment of VNS, while comprehensive IEDs and neuronal migration disorders were indicative of the poor effect. Also, temporal lobe epilepsy was generally effectively controlled by this therapy and yougers seemed to get more benefit from VNS. Additionally, other indexes, such as cytokine profile, slow cortical potential (SCP) shift, preoperative heart rate variability (HRV), EEG reactivity and connectomic profiling, maybe predict the results of VNS.
CONCLUSION
In summary, these conventional and other new factors should be analyzed further by more science and rigorous experimental design to identify the clear correlation with the outcome of VNS therapy.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.