The Importance of Impedance: A Case of Responsive Neurostimulation Failure Characterized by Concurrent Stereoelectroencephalography.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sandhya R Palit, Kevin Hines, Jamie J Van Gompel, Brian N Lundstrom, Nicholas M Gregg
{"title":"The Importance of Impedance: A Case of Responsive Neurostimulation Failure Characterized by Concurrent Stereoelectroencephalography.","authors":"Sandhya R Palit, Kevin Hines, Jamie J Van Gompel, Brian N Lundstrom, Nicholas M Gregg","doi":"10.1097/WNP.0000000000001176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Summary: </strong>Epilepsy neuromodulation treatment failure is a significant challenge, with multiple possible causes. The responsive neurostimulation (RNS) system delivers stimulation from a single current source, and the relative flow of the electrical current through each stimulating contact is inversely proportional to the relative impedance of each contact. Current shunting through low-impedance contacts (i.e., intraventricular contacts) can divert therapy away from the intended targets and may be a cause of treatment failure. We present a case of a patient with bitemporal epilepsy and bitemporal encephaloceles, with poor response to bilateral mesial temporal RNS, who completed stereotactic EEG (sEEG) monitoring to investigate the possible causes of treatment failure. The sEEG was safely completed without damaging the RNS device. The sEEG recorded independent bitemporal interictal epileptiform discharges and seizures, which did not arise from sampled encephalocele regions. The sEEG-recorded RNS stimulation artifact was reduced in the left mesial temporal region relative to the right, which suggested potential current shunting through the right-sided contacts. Impedance measurements confirmed several low-impedance contacts from the right lead, with associated intraventricular position on imaging. At last follow up, 161 days after replacement of the right lead, the patient experienced an additional 58% reduction in seizure burden. Effective therapy delivery by single-current-source neurostimulation systems, such as RNS, critically depends on relative electrode impedances. Current shunting through low-impedance contacts is an underappreciated potential cause of treatment failure. Routine impedance assessments and individualized stimulation programs are recommended to avoid unintended current diversion. Concurrent sEEG monitoring and active RNS are feasible and can characterize stimulation effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":15516,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000001176","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary: Epilepsy neuromodulation treatment failure is a significant challenge, with multiple possible causes. The responsive neurostimulation (RNS) system delivers stimulation from a single current source, and the relative flow of the electrical current through each stimulating contact is inversely proportional to the relative impedance of each contact. Current shunting through low-impedance contacts (i.e., intraventricular contacts) can divert therapy away from the intended targets and may be a cause of treatment failure. We present a case of a patient with bitemporal epilepsy and bitemporal encephaloceles, with poor response to bilateral mesial temporal RNS, who completed stereotactic EEG (sEEG) monitoring to investigate the possible causes of treatment failure. The sEEG was safely completed without damaging the RNS device. The sEEG recorded independent bitemporal interictal epileptiform discharges and seizures, which did not arise from sampled encephalocele regions. The sEEG-recorded RNS stimulation artifact was reduced in the left mesial temporal region relative to the right, which suggested potential current shunting through the right-sided contacts. Impedance measurements confirmed several low-impedance contacts from the right lead, with associated intraventricular position on imaging. At last follow up, 161 days after replacement of the right lead, the patient experienced an additional 58% reduction in seizure burden. Effective therapy delivery by single-current-source neurostimulation systems, such as RNS, critically depends on relative electrode impedances. Current shunting through low-impedance contacts is an underappreciated potential cause of treatment failure. Routine impedance assessments and individualized stimulation programs are recommended to avoid unintended current diversion. Concurrent sEEG monitoring and active RNS are feasible and can characterize stimulation effects.

阻抗的重要性:1例以并发立体脑电图为特征的反应性神经刺激失败。
总结:癫痫神经调节治疗失败是一个重大挑战,有多种可能的原因。响应性神经刺激(RNS)系统通过单一电流源提供刺激,通过每个刺激触点的电流相对流量与每个触点的相对阻抗成反比。通过低阻抗触点(即脑室内触点)的电流分流可能使治疗偏离预期目标,并可能是治疗失败的原因。我们报告了一例双颞叶癫痫和双颞叶脑泡突出患者,对双侧内侧颞叶RNS反应不佳,完成了立体定向脑电图(sEEG)监测,以探讨治疗失败的可能原因。在没有损坏RNS设备的情况下,sEEG安全完成。sEEG记录了独立的双颞间期癫痫样放电和癫痫发作,这不是由取样的脑膨出区域引起的。相对于右侧,seeeg记录的RNS刺激伪影在左侧内侧颞区减少,这表明电位电流通过右侧触点分流。阻抗测量证实了来自右导联的几个低阻抗接触,在成像上与脑室内位置相关。在最后一次随访中,更换右导联161天后,患者癫痫发作负担又减少了58%。单电流源神经刺激系统(如RNS)的有效治疗递送严重依赖于相对电极阻抗。通过低阻抗触点的电流分流是治疗失败的一个未被充分认识的潜在原因。建议进行常规阻抗评估和个体化刺激方案,以避免意外的电流分流。同时监测sEEG和主动RNS是可行的,可以表征刺激效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology
Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
198
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​The Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology features both topical reviews and original research in both central and peripheral neurophysiology, as related to patient evaluation and treatment. Official Journal of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信