Cargando…
Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience
Objective: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been used for adjunctive treatment in drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) for decades. Nevertheless, information is lacking on possible potential prognostic factors. Our study presents the efficacy and safety of VNS with a focus on prognostic factors in 45 pati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783695/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556153 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11247536 |
_version_ | 1784857638789447680 |
---|---|
author | Shan, Ming Mao, Hongliang Xie, Hutao Gan, Yifei Wu, Delong Song, Jian Bai, Yutong Zhang, Jianguo |
author_facet | Shan, Ming Mao, Hongliang Xie, Hutao Gan, Yifei Wu, Delong Song, Jian Bai, Yutong Zhang, Jianguo |
author_sort | Shan, Ming |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been used for adjunctive treatment in drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) for decades. Nevertheless, information is lacking on possible potential prognostic factors. Our study presents the efficacy and safety of VNS with a focus on prognostic factors in 45 patients with DRE. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcome of 45 consecutive patients with DRE undergoing VNS implantation in The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University between November 2016 and August 2021. Medical records were aggregated across all patient visits. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the prognostic factors. Results: Significant decrease in seizure frequency was observed after intermittent stimulation of the vagus nerve. According to the modified McHugh classification, 11 patients (24.4%) were Class I, 11 patients (24.4%) were Class II, four patients (8.9%) were Class III, 10 patients (22.2%) were Class IV, and nine patients (20.0%) were Class V. Notably, 22 patients (48.9%) were responders and four patients (8.9%) were seizure-free at the final follow-up. No significant prognostic factors were found in this cohort. Furthermore, 37 patients reported improved quality of life. Of the patients, 22 (48.9%) experienced adverse events after surgery; hoarseness, discomfort at the surgical site, and coughing were the most common. Conclusion: The results confirmed the efficacy and safety of VNS. No prognostic factors were identified. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9783695 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97836952022-12-24 Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience Shan, Ming Mao, Hongliang Xie, Hutao Gan, Yifei Wu, Delong Song, Jian Bai, Yutong Zhang, Jianguo J Clin Med Article Objective: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been used for adjunctive treatment in drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) for decades. Nevertheless, information is lacking on possible potential prognostic factors. Our study presents the efficacy and safety of VNS with a focus on prognostic factors in 45 patients with DRE. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcome of 45 consecutive patients with DRE undergoing VNS implantation in The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University between November 2016 and August 2021. Medical records were aggregated across all patient visits. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the prognostic factors. Results: Significant decrease in seizure frequency was observed after intermittent stimulation of the vagus nerve. According to the modified McHugh classification, 11 patients (24.4%) were Class I, 11 patients (24.4%) were Class II, four patients (8.9%) were Class III, 10 patients (22.2%) were Class IV, and nine patients (20.0%) were Class V. Notably, 22 patients (48.9%) were responders and four patients (8.9%) were seizure-free at the final follow-up. No significant prognostic factors were found in this cohort. Furthermore, 37 patients reported improved quality of life. Of the patients, 22 (48.9%) experienced adverse events after surgery; hoarseness, discomfort at the surgical site, and coughing were the most common. Conclusion: The results confirmed the efficacy and safety of VNS. No prognostic factors were identified. MDPI 2022-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9783695/ /pubmed/36556153 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11247536 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Shan, Ming Mao, Hongliang Xie, Hutao Gan, Yifei Wu, Delong Song, Jian Bai, Yutong Zhang, Jianguo Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience |
title | Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience |
title_full | Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience |
title_fullStr | Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience |
title_full_unstemmed | Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience |
title_short | Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Drug Resistant Epilepsy: Clinical Outcome, Adverse Events, and Potential Prognostic Factors in a Single Center Experience |
title_sort | vagus nerve stimulation for drug resistant epilepsy: clinical outcome, adverse events, and potential prognostic factors in a single center experience |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783695/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556153 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11247536 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shanming vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT maohongliang vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT xiehutao vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT ganyifei vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT wudelong vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT songjian vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT baiyutong vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience AT zhangjianguo vagusnervestimulationfordrugresistantepilepsyclinicaloutcomeadverseeventsandpotentialprognosticfactorsinasinglecenterexperience |