Neurostimulation for epilepsy refers to the application of electricity to affect the central nervous system, with the goal of reducing seizure frequency and severity. We review the available evidence for the use of neurostimulation to treat pediatric epilepsy, including vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), chronic subthreshold cortical stimulation (CSCS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). We consider possible mechanisms of action and safety concerns, and we propose a methodology for selecting between available options. In general, we find neurostimulation is safe and effective, although any high quality evidence applying neurostimulation to pediatrics is lacking. Further research is needed to understand neuromodulatory systems, and to identify biomarkers of response in order to establish optimal stimulation paradigms.

There is a paucity of treatment options for cognitively normal individuals with drug resistant genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE). Centromedian nucleus of the thalamus (CM) deep brain stimulation (DBS) may be a viable treatment for GGE. Here, we present the case of a 27-year-old cognitively normal woman with drug resistant GGE, with childhood onset. Seizure semiology are absence seizures and generalized onset tonic clonic (GTC) seizures. At baseline she had 4–8 GTC seizures per month and weekly absence seizures despite three antiseizure medications and vagus nerve stimulation. A multidisciplinary committee recommended off-label use of CM DBS in this patient. Over 12-months of CM DBS she had two GTC seizure days, which were in the setting of medication withdrawal and illness, and no GTC seizures in the last 6 months. There was no significant change in the burden of absence seizures. Presently, just two studies clearly document CM DBS in cognitively normal individuals with GGE or idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) [in contrast to studies of cognitively impaired individuals with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEE)]. Our results suggest that CM DBS can be an effective treatment for cognitively normal individuals with GGE and underscore the need for prospective studies of CM DBS.

No abstract

Deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) use highfrequency stimulation (HFS) per the pivotal trials and manufacturerrecommended therapy protocols. However, not all patients respond to HFS. In this retrospective case series, 10 patients implanted with the RNS System were programmed with low-frequency stimulation (LFS) to treat their seizures; nine of these patients were previously treated with HFS (100 Hz or greater). LFS was defined as frequency < 10 Hz. Burst duration was increased to at least 1000 ms. With HFS, patients had a median seizure reduction (MSR) of 13% (interquartile range[IQR] = −67 to 54) after a median of 19 months (IQR = 8-49). In contrast, LFS was associated with a 67% MSR (IQR = 13-95) when compared to HFS and 76% MSR (IQR = 43-91) when compared to baseline prior to implantation. Charge delivered per hour and pulses per day were not significantly different between HFS and LFS, although time stimulated per day was longer for LFS (228 min) than for HFS (7 min). There were no LFS-specific adverse effects reported by any of the patients. LFS could represent an alternative, effective method for delivering stimulation in focal drug-resistant epilepsy patients treated with the RNS System.