BackgroundResponsive neurostimulation (RNS System) has been utilized as a treatment for intractable epilepsy. The RNS System delivers stimulation in response to detected abnormal activity, via leads covering the seizure foci, in response to detections of predefined epileptiform activity with the goal of decreasing seizure frequency and severity. While thalamic leads are often implanted in combination with cortical strip leads, implantation and stimulation with bilateral thalamic leads alone is less common, and the ability to detect electrographic seizures using RNS System thalamic leads is uncertain.ObjectiveThe present study retrospectively evaluated fourteen patients with RNS System depth leads implanted in the thalamus, with or without concomitant implantation of cortical strip leads, to determine the ability to detect electrographic seizures in the thalamus. Detailed patient presentations and lead trajectories were reviewed alongside electroencephalographic (ECoG) analyses.ResultsAnterior nucleus thalamic (ANT) leads, whether bilateral or unilateral and combined with a cortical strip lead, successfully detected and terminated epileptiform activity, as demonstrated by Cases 2 and 3. Similarly, bilateral centromedian thalamic (CMT) leads or a combination of one centromedian thalamic alongside a cortical strip lead also demonstrated the ability to detect electrographic seizures as seen in Cases 6 and 9. Bilateral pulvinar leads likewise produced reliable seizure detection in Patient 14. Detections of electrographic seizures in thalamic nuclei did not appear to be affected by whether the patient was pediatric or adult at the time of RNS System implantation. Sole thalamic leads paralleled the combination of thalamic and cortical strip leads in terms of preventing the propagation of electrographic seizures.ConclusionThalamic nuclei present a promising target for detection and stimulation via the RNS System for seizures with multifocal or generalized onsets. These areas provide a modifiable, reversible therapeutic option for patients who are not candidates for surgical resection or ablation.

BACKGROUND After MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) demonstrated that endovascular therapy improved outcomes in patients with stroke, the number of endovascular procedures has risen sharply. We describe acute transient contrast‐induced neurological deficit (ATCIND), a group of neurological syndromes associated with arterial contrast administration during angiography. Our goal is to elucidate the incidence, risk factors, outcomes, pathogenesis, and diagnostic characteristics of ATCIND. Our primary objective is to elucidate the incidence of ATCIND in the setting of coronary or cerebral angiography. Secondary outcomes include potential risk factors, demographics, treatment modalities, and patient recovery. METHODS The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. The databases of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase were queried, yielding studies from 1974 to 2021. Inclusion criteria for articles were the following: (1) contrast‐induced encephalopathy, contrast‐induced neurotoxicity, or cortical blindness after contrast administration during angiography were the focus of the article; (2) incidence was reported; (3) studies included ≥3 cases; and (4) follow‐up tests were described to rule out other causes. Exclusion criteria included the following: (1) incidence was not reported; (2) unavailable in the English language; (3) abstracts and unpublished studies; and (4) did not exclude other possible causes, or findings suggested other possible causes, such as worsening ischemic injury. Of 627 articles, 7 were retained. This systematic review with meta‐analysis was performed in accordance with guidelines provided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) checklists. Independent extraction by multiple reviewers was performed. Data were pooled using a random‐effects model. RESULTS The primary study outcome was incidence of ATCIND, which was formulated before data collection began. We hypothesized that the pooled incidence of ATCIND would be similar to that of individual studies. A total of 70 of 21007 patients had the diagnosis of contrast‐induced encephalopathy, contrast‐induced neurotoxicity or angiography‐associated cortical blindness, and ATCIND. The incidence rate of ATCIND is estimated to be 0.51% (CI, 0.3%–1.0%; P <0.001 [ I 2 =29.3]), or 51 per 10 000 patients. Pooled data for risk factors for contrast‐induced encephalopathy were higher contrast dose (odds ratio [OR], 1.072; 95% CI, 0.952–1.192 [ P <0.001]; I 2 =0), and prior stroke (OR, 5.153; CI 1.726–8.581 [ P =0.003]; I 2 =0). Contrast dose >150 mL was a positive, significant predictor of visual disturbance (OR, 7.083; CI, 1.1742–42.793 [ P =0.033]). Full recovery is estimated at 89.5% (95% CI, 76.9%–95.6%; P <0.001 [ I 2 =0]). CONCLUSIONS This study confirms the rare incidence of ATCIND, although it shows moderate heterogeneity, likely reflecting the type of angiography performed. Risk factors include larger contrast dose and prior stroke. Full recovery occurs in the majority of patients. It should remain in the differential diagnosis in patients with certain risk factors for blood–brain barrier compromise.

No abstract

No abstract