Open-Loop Deep Brain Stimulation Versus Closed-Loop Responsive Neurostimulation in Drug-Resistant Bitemporal Epilepsy: A Narrative Review.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-10-14 DOI:10.4103/aian.aian_226_26
Syeda Fatima Zehra, Muhammad A Hassan, Pratiksha Baliga, Atif S Khatib, Faheem Ullah
{"title":"Open-Loop Deep Brain Stimulation Versus Closed-Loop Responsive Neurostimulation in Drug-Resistant Bitemporal Epilepsy: A Narrative Review.","authors":"Syeda Fatima Zehra, Muhammad A Hassan, Pratiksha Baliga, Atif S Khatib, Faheem Ullah","doi":"10.4103/aian.aian_226_26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Drug-resistant bitemporal epilepsy presents a therapeutic challenge when resective surgery is not feasible due to bilateral seizure onset or eloquent cortex involvement. Neuromodulation has emerged as an alternative, with open-loop deep brain stimulation (DBS) and closed-loop responsive neurostimulation (RNS) as implantable strategies. Comparative indications for modality selection remain unclear. A narrative review of articles published from January 2007 to January 2026 was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE. Approximately 120 articles were screened, and 39 studies were included. Due to heterogeneity in study design, findings were synthesized qualitatively. Both DBS and RNS significantly reduce seizure frequency in drug-resistant bitemporal epilepsy, with a median seizure reduction of approximately 60% to 75%. Seizure freedom, however, remained limited, reflecting the palliative nature of these treatments. Open-loop anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) DBS provides network-level modulation with low maintenance, while hippocampal DBS offers localized temporal inhibition. Conversely, closed-loop RNS delivers adaptive focal stimulation via real-time sensing and yields chronic intracranial electroencephalogram data. While both modalities show comparable efficacy, RNS may be advantageous in focal or asymmetric bitemporal epilepsy. Cognitive outcomes were favorable for both techniques, with RNS demonstrating the prevention of memory and language decline. Both DBS and RNS are palliative neuromodulatory options for patients in whom resective surgery is not feasible. Treatment selection should be individualized based on seizure network characteristics, laterality, monitoring needs, participation capacity, and cognitive considerations. The primary goal is to reduce seizure frequency and improve quality of life rather than to achieve seizure freedom. Future multicenter studies and biomarker-driven strategies are needed to refine selection and improve long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":8036,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology","volume":" ","pages":"697-703"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aian.aian_226_26","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Drug-resistant bitemporal epilepsy presents a therapeutic challenge when resective surgery is not feasible due to bilateral seizure onset or eloquent cortex involvement. Neuromodulation has emerged as an alternative, with open-loop deep brain stimulation (DBS) and closed-loop responsive neurostimulation (RNS) as implantable strategies. Comparative indications for modality selection remain unclear. A narrative review of articles published from January 2007 to January 2026 was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE. Approximately 120 articles were screened, and 39 studies were included. Due to heterogeneity in study design, findings were synthesized qualitatively. Both DBS and RNS significantly reduce seizure frequency in drug-resistant bitemporal epilepsy, with a median seizure reduction of approximately 60% to 75%. Seizure freedom, however, remained limited, reflecting the palliative nature of these treatments. Open-loop anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) DBS provides network-level modulation with low maintenance, while hippocampal DBS offers localized temporal inhibition. Conversely, closed-loop RNS delivers adaptive focal stimulation via real-time sensing and yields chronic intracranial electroencephalogram data. While both modalities show comparable efficacy, RNS may be advantageous in focal or asymmetric bitemporal epilepsy. Cognitive outcomes were favorable for both techniques, with RNS demonstrating the prevention of memory and language decline. Both DBS and RNS are palliative neuromodulatory options for patients in whom resective surgery is not feasible. Treatment selection should be individualized based on seizure network characteristics, laterality, monitoring needs, participation capacity, and cognitive considerations. The primary goal is to reduce seizure frequency and improve quality of life rather than to achieve seizure freedom. Future multicenter studies and biomarker-driven strategies are needed to refine selection and improve long-term outcomes.

开环深部脑刺激与闭环反应性神经刺激对耐药双颞叶癫痫的影响:一项叙述性综述。
摘要:由于双侧癫痫发作或颞叶皮层受累,切除手术不可行,耐药双颞叶癫痫的治疗面临挑战。神经调节已成为另一种选择,开环深部脑刺激(DBS)和闭环反应性神经刺激(RNS)作为植入式策略。模式选择的比较指标仍不清楚。在PubMed/MEDLINE上对2007年1月至2026年1月发表的文章进行叙述性回顾。大约120篇文章被筛选,39项研究被纳入。由于研究设计的异质性,研究结果是定性综合的。DBS和RNS均可显著降低耐药双颞叶癫痫的发作频率,中位发作减少约60%至75%。然而,癫痫发作自由仍然有限,反映了这些治疗的姑息性。丘脑前核开环DBS (ANT)提供网络水平的低维持调节,而海马DBS提供局部的时间抑制。相反,闭环RNS通过实时传感提供适应性局灶刺激,并产生慢性颅内脑电图数据。虽然两种方式都显示出相当的疗效,但RNS可能对局灶性或不对称双颞癫痫有利。两种技术的认知结果都是有利的,RNS显示可以预防记忆和语言衰退。DBS和RNS对于不能进行相应手术的患者都是姑息性神经调节的选择。治疗选择应根据癫痫发作网络特征、侧边性、监测需要、参与能力和认知因素进行个体化。主要目标是减少癫痫发作频率和改善生活质量,而不是实现癫痫发作自由。未来的多中心研究和生物标志物驱动的策略需要改进选择和改善长期结果。
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
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology Nervous System Diseases-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
293
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal has a clinical foundation and has been utilized most by clinical neurologists for improving the practice of neurology. While the focus is on neurology in India, the journal publishes manuscripts of high value from all parts of the world. Journal publishes reviews of various types, original articles, short communications, interesting images and case reports. The journal respects the scientific submission of its authors and believes in following an expeditious double-blind peer review process and endeavors to complete the review process within scheduled time frame. A significant effort from the author and the journal perhaps enables to strike an equilibrium to meet the professional expectations of the peers in the world of scientific publication. AIAN believes in safeguarding the privacy rights of human subjects. In order to comply with it, the journal instructs all authors when uploading the manuscript to also add the ethical clearance (human/animals)/ informed consent of subject in the manuscript. This applies to the study/case report that involves animal/human subjects/human specimens e.g. extracted tooth part/soft tissue for biopsy/in vitro analysis.
×
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
小红书