Cargando…

An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices

OBJECTIVE: Cortical stimulation is an important component of stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG). Despite this, there is currently no standardized approach and significant heterogeneity in the literature regarding cortical stimulation practices. Via an international survey of SEEG clinicians, we sou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cockle, Emily, Rayner, Genevieve, Malpas, Charles, Alpitsis, Rubina, Rheims, Sylvain, O'Brien, Terence J, Neal, Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10472359/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37437189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12790
_version_ 1785100058831618048
author Cockle, Emily
Rayner, Genevieve
Malpas, Charles
Alpitsis, Rubina
Rheims, Sylvain
O'Brien, Terence J
Neal, Andrew
author_facet Cockle, Emily
Rayner, Genevieve
Malpas, Charles
Alpitsis, Rubina
Rheims, Sylvain
O'Brien, Terence J
Neal, Andrew
author_sort Cockle, Emily
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Cortical stimulation is an important component of stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG). Despite this, there is currently no standardized approach and significant heterogeneity in the literature regarding cortical stimulation practices. Via an international survey of SEEG clinicians, we sought to examine the spectrum of cortical stimulation practices to reveal areas of consensus and variability. METHODS: A 68‐item questionnaire was developed to understand cortical stimulation practices including neurostimulation parameters, interpretation of epileptogenicity, functional and cognitive assessment and subsequent surgical decisions. Multiple recruitment pathways were pursued, with the questionnaire distributed directly to 183 clinicians. RESULTS: Responses were received from 56 clinicians across 17 countries with experience ranging from 2 to 60 years (M = 10.73, SD = 9.44). Neurostimulation parameters varied considerably, with maximum current ranging from 3 to 10 mA (M = 5.33, SD = 2.29) for 1 Hz and from 2 to 15 mA (M = 6.54, SD = 3.68) for 50 Hz stimulation. Charge density ranged from 8 to 200 μC/cm(2), with up to 43% of responders utilizing charge densities higher than recommended upper safety limits, i.e. 55 μC/cm(2). North American responders reported statistically significant higher maximum current (P < 0.001) for 1 Hz stimulation and lower pulse width for 1 and 50 Hz stimulation (P = 0.008, P < 0.001, respectively) compared to European responders. All clinicians evaluated language, speech, and motor function during cortical stimulation; in contrast, 42% assessed visuospatial or visual function, 29% memory, and 13% executive function. Striking differences were reported in approaches to assessment, classification of positive sites, and surgical decisions guided by cortical stimulation. Patterns of consistency were observed for interpretation of the localizing capacity of stimulated electroclinical seizures and auras, with habitual electroclinical seizures induced by 1 Hz stimulation considered the most localizing. SIGNIFICANCE: SEEG cortical stimulation practices differed vastly across clinicians internationally, highlighting the need for consensus‐based clinical guidelines. In particular, an internationally standardized approach to assessment, classification, and functional prognostication will provide a common clinical and research framework for optimizing outcomes for people with drug‐resistant epilepsy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10472359
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104723592023-09-02 An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices Cockle, Emily Rayner, Genevieve Malpas, Charles Alpitsis, Rubina Rheims, Sylvain O'Brien, Terence J Neal, Andrew Epilepsia Open Original Articles OBJECTIVE: Cortical stimulation is an important component of stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG). Despite this, there is currently no standardized approach and significant heterogeneity in the literature regarding cortical stimulation practices. Via an international survey of SEEG clinicians, we sought to examine the spectrum of cortical stimulation practices to reveal areas of consensus and variability. METHODS: A 68‐item questionnaire was developed to understand cortical stimulation practices including neurostimulation parameters, interpretation of epileptogenicity, functional and cognitive assessment and subsequent surgical decisions. Multiple recruitment pathways were pursued, with the questionnaire distributed directly to 183 clinicians. RESULTS: Responses were received from 56 clinicians across 17 countries with experience ranging from 2 to 60 years (M = 10.73, SD = 9.44). Neurostimulation parameters varied considerably, with maximum current ranging from 3 to 10 mA (M = 5.33, SD = 2.29) for 1 Hz and from 2 to 15 mA (M = 6.54, SD = 3.68) for 50 Hz stimulation. Charge density ranged from 8 to 200 μC/cm(2), with up to 43% of responders utilizing charge densities higher than recommended upper safety limits, i.e. 55 μC/cm(2). North American responders reported statistically significant higher maximum current (P < 0.001) for 1 Hz stimulation and lower pulse width for 1 and 50 Hz stimulation (P = 0.008, P < 0.001, respectively) compared to European responders. All clinicians evaluated language, speech, and motor function during cortical stimulation; in contrast, 42% assessed visuospatial or visual function, 29% memory, and 13% executive function. Striking differences were reported in approaches to assessment, classification of positive sites, and surgical decisions guided by cortical stimulation. Patterns of consistency were observed for interpretation of the localizing capacity of stimulated electroclinical seizures and auras, with habitual electroclinical seizures induced by 1 Hz stimulation considered the most localizing. SIGNIFICANCE: SEEG cortical stimulation practices differed vastly across clinicians internationally, highlighting the need for consensus‐based clinical guidelines. In particular, an internationally standardized approach to assessment, classification, and functional prognostication will provide a common clinical and research framework for optimizing outcomes for people with drug‐resistant epilepsy. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10472359/ /pubmed/37437189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12790 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Epilepsia Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Cockle, Emily
Rayner, Genevieve
Malpas, Charles
Alpitsis, Rubina
Rheims, Sylvain
O'Brien, Terence J
Neal, Andrew
An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices
title An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices
title_full An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices
title_fullStr An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices
title_full_unstemmed An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices
title_short An international survey of SEEG cortical stimulation practices
title_sort international survey of seeg cortical stimulation practices
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10472359/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37437189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12790
work_keys_str_mv AT cockleemily aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT raynergenevieve aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT malpascharles aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT alpitsisrubina aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT rheimssylvain aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT obrienterencej aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT nealandrew aninternationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT cockleemily internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT raynergenevieve internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT malpascharles internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT alpitsisrubina internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT rheimssylvain internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT obrienterencej internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices
AT nealandrew internationalsurveyofseegcorticalstimulationpractices