Astrid Durez , Tom Theys , Johannes van Loon , Wim Van Paesschen
{"title":"迷走神经刺激治疗耐药性癫痫的保留率:单中心回顾性研究。","authors":"Astrid Durez , Tom Theys , Johannes van Loon , Wim Van Paesschen","doi":"10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2024.107383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The aim of this single-centre, retrospective, observational study was to evaluate long-term effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) by using retention rate as a surrogate measure for seizure reduction. We included all patients with DRE, treated at the adult neurology department of the University Hospitals Leuven and who started VNS therapy from January 1, 1994, until May 1, 2021, with follow-up data cutoff on January 1, 2023. Retention rate of VNS was defined as the percentage of patients who maintain VNS at established time points. We estimated cumulative retention rate and battery replacement rate and correlated these with seizure reduction, using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Statistical analysis of potential predictors of VNS outcome (age, sex and epilepsy duration at implantation) was performed using mono- and multivariate analyses. VNS was started in 110 patients with DRE, with a mean follow-up of 8.7 years (SD 6.5). VNS was discontinued in 55 patients (50%), with ineffectiveness as the main reason for discontinuation (98%). The battery was replaced at least once in 42 patients (38%). Estimated retention rates were 70%, 52%, 45% and 33% after 5, 10, 15 and 20 years, respectively. Estimated first battery replacement rates were 16%, 42% and 47% after 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively. Both estimates showed a statistically significant correlation with seizure reduction. No independent predictors of long-term outcome of VNS were found. This is the first long-term study using retention rate of VNS to assess effectiveness. VNS is a well-tolerated therapy, but retention rates decline with long follow-up.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11914,"journal":{"name":"Epilepsy Research","volume":"203 ","pages":"Article 107383"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920121124000986/pdfft?md5=cd1c56dd24652243d1da00a23c936101&pid=1-s2.0-S0920121124000986-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retention rate of vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy: A single-centre, retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Astrid Durez , Tom Theys , Johannes van Loon , Wim Van Paesschen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2024.107383\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The aim of this single-centre, retrospective, observational study was to evaluate long-term effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) by using retention rate as a surrogate measure for seizure reduction. We included all patients with DRE, treated at the adult neurology department of the University Hospitals Leuven and who started VNS therapy from January 1, 1994, until May 1, 2021, with follow-up data cutoff on January 1, 2023. Retention rate of VNS was defined as the percentage of patients who maintain VNS at established time points. We estimated cumulative retention rate and battery replacement rate and correlated these with seizure reduction, using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Statistical analysis of potential predictors of VNS outcome (age, sex and epilepsy duration at implantation) was performed using mono- and multivariate analyses. VNS was started in 110 patients with DRE, with a mean follow-up of 8.7 years (SD 6.5). VNS was discontinued in 55 patients (50%), with ineffectiveness as the main reason for discontinuation (98%). The battery was replaced at least once in 42 patients (38%). Estimated retention rates were 70%, 52%, 45% and 33% after 5, 10, 15 and 20 years, respectively. Estimated first battery replacement rates were 16%, 42% and 47% after 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively. Both estimates showed a statistically significant correlation with seizure reduction. No independent predictors of long-term outcome of VNS were found. This is the first long-term study using retention rate of VNS to assess effectiveness. VNS is a well-tolerated therapy, but retention rates decline with long follow-up.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epilepsy Research\",\"volume\":\"203 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107383\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920121124000986/pdfft?md5=cd1c56dd24652243d1da00a23c936101&pid=1-s2.0-S0920121124000986-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epilepsy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920121124000986\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epilepsy Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920121124000986","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Retention rate of vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy: A single-centre, retrospective study.
The aim of this single-centre, retrospective, observational study was to evaluate long-term effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) by using retention rate as a surrogate measure for seizure reduction. We included all patients with DRE, treated at the adult neurology department of the University Hospitals Leuven and who started VNS therapy from January 1, 1994, until May 1, 2021, with follow-up data cutoff on January 1, 2023. Retention rate of VNS was defined as the percentage of patients who maintain VNS at established time points. We estimated cumulative retention rate and battery replacement rate and correlated these with seizure reduction, using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Statistical analysis of potential predictors of VNS outcome (age, sex and epilepsy duration at implantation) was performed using mono- and multivariate analyses. VNS was started in 110 patients with DRE, with a mean follow-up of 8.7 years (SD 6.5). VNS was discontinued in 55 patients (50%), with ineffectiveness as the main reason for discontinuation (98%). The battery was replaced at least once in 42 patients (38%). Estimated retention rates were 70%, 52%, 45% and 33% after 5, 10, 15 and 20 years, respectively. Estimated first battery replacement rates were 16%, 42% and 47% after 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively. Both estimates showed a statistically significant correlation with seizure reduction. No independent predictors of long-term outcome of VNS were found. This is the first long-term study using retention rate of VNS to assess effectiveness. VNS is a well-tolerated therapy, but retention rates decline with long follow-up.
期刊介绍:
Epilepsy Research provides for publication of high quality articles in both basic and clinical epilepsy research, with a special emphasis on translational research that ultimately relates to epilepsy as a human condition. The journal is intended to provide a forum for reporting the best and most rigorous epilepsy research from all disciplines ranging from biophysics and molecular biology to epidemiological and psychosocial research. As such the journal will publish original papers relevant to epilepsy from any scientific discipline and also studies of a multidisciplinary nature. Clinical and experimental research papers adopting fresh conceptual approaches to the study of epilepsy and its treatment are encouraged. The overriding criteria for publication are novelty, significant clinical or experimental relevance, and interest to a multidisciplinary audience in the broad arena of epilepsy. Review articles focused on any topic of epilepsy research will also be considered, but only if they present an exceptionally clear synthesis of current knowledge and future directions of a research area, based on a critical assessment of the available data or on hypotheses that are likely to stimulate more critical thinking and further advances in an area of epilepsy research.