College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, Birmingham, UK ; Children's Epilepsy Surgery Programme, The Birmingham Children's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2014 Nov 14;10:2191-200. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S60854. eCollection 2014.
About one third of patients with epilepsy are refractory to medical treatment. For these patients, alternative treatment options include implantable neurostimulation devices such as vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and responsive neurostimulation systems (RNS). We conducted a systematic literature review to assess the available evidence on the clinical efficacy of these devices in patients with refractory epilepsy across their lifespan. VNS has the largest evidence base, and numerous randomized controlled trials and open-label studies support its use in the treatment of refractory epilepsy. It was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1997 for treatment of partial seizures, but has also shown significant benefit in the treatment of generalized seizures. Results in adult populations have been more encouraging than in pediatric populations, where more studies are required. VNS is considered a safe and well-tolerated treatment, and serious side effects are rare. DBS is a well-established treatment for several movement disorders, and has a small evidence base for treatment of refractory epilepsy. Stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus has shown the most encouraging results, where significant decreases in seizure frequency were reported. Other potential targets include the centromedian thalamic nucleus, hippocampus, cerebellum, and basal ganglia structures. Preliminary results on RNS, new-generation implantable neurostimulation devices which stimulate brain structures only when epileptic activity is detected, are encouraging. Overall, implantable neurostimulation devices appear to be a safe and beneficial treatment option for patients in whom medical treatment has failed to adequately control their epilepsy. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to provide a sufficient evidence base for the inclusion of DBS and RNS in clinical guidelines.
大约三分之一的癫痫患者对药物治疗没有反应。对于这些患者,替代治疗方案包括植入式神经刺激器,如迷走神经刺激(VNS)、深部脑刺激(DBS)和反应性神经刺激系统(RNS)。我们进行了系统的文献回顾,以评估这些设备在整个生命周期内对难治性癫痫患者的临床疗效的现有证据。VNS 的证据基础最大,许多随机对照试验和开放标签研究支持其用于治疗难治性癫痫。它于 1997 年获得美国食品和药物管理局批准,用于治疗部分性发作,但在治疗全面性发作方面也显示出显著的益处。成人人群的结果比儿科人群更令人鼓舞,儿科人群需要更多的研究。VNS 被认为是一种安全且耐受良好的治疗方法,严重的副作用很少见。DBS 是几种运动障碍的成熟治疗方法,在难治性癫痫治疗方面的证据基础较小。刺激丘脑前核显示出最令人鼓舞的结果,报告称癫痫发作频率显著降低。其他潜在的目标包括中央丘脑核、海马体、小脑和基底神经节结构。新一代植入式神经刺激器 RNS 的初步结果令人鼓舞,这些设备仅在检测到癫痫活动时才刺激大脑结构。总体而言,植入式神经刺激器似乎是一种安全且有益的治疗选择,适用于药物治疗未能充分控制其癫痫发作的患者。需要进一步的大规模随机对照试验,为 DBS 和 RNS 纳入临床指南提供足够的证据基础。