We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Review
Vagus nerve stimulation vs. corpus callosotomy in the treatment of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: a meta-analysis.
PURPOSE: Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is an epileptogenic disorder that arises in childhood and is typically characterized by multiple seizure types, slow spike-and-wave complexes on EEG and cognitive impairment. If medical treatment fails, patients can proceed to one of two palliative surgeries, vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) or corpus callosotomy (CC). Their relative seizure control rates in LGS have not been well studied. The purpose of this paper is to compare seizure reduction rates between VNS and CC in LGS using meta-analyses of published data.
METHODS: A systematic search of Pubmed, Ovidsp, and Cochrane was performed to find articles that met the following criteria: (1) prospective or retrospective study, (2) at least one patient diagnosed with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and (3) well-defined measure of seizure frequency reduction. Seizure reduction rates were divided into seizure subtypes, as well as total seizures, and categorized as 100%, >75%, and >50%. Patient groups were compared using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t-test for continuous measures. Pooled proportions with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of seizure outcomes were estimated for total seizures and seizure subtypes using random effects methods.
RESULTS: 17 VNS and 9 CC studies met the criteria for inclusion. CC had a significantly better outcome than VNS for >50% atonic seizure reduction (80.0% [67.0-90.0%] vs. 54.1% [32.1-75.4%], p<0.05) and for >75% atonic seizure reduction (70.0% [48.05-87.0%] vs. 26.3% [5.8-54.7%], p<0.05). All other seizure types, as well as total number of seizures, showed no statistically significant difference between VNS and CC.
CONCLUSIONS: CC may be more beneficial for LGS patients whose predominant disabling seizure type is atonic. For all other seizure types, VNS offers comparable rates to CC.
METHODS: A systematic search of Pubmed, Ovidsp, and Cochrane was performed to find articles that met the following criteria: (1) prospective or retrospective study, (2) at least one patient diagnosed with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and (3) well-defined measure of seizure frequency reduction. Seizure reduction rates were divided into seizure subtypes, as well as total seizures, and categorized as 100%, >75%, and >50%. Patient groups were compared using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t-test for continuous measures. Pooled proportions with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of seizure outcomes were estimated for total seizures and seizure subtypes using random effects methods.
RESULTS: 17 VNS and 9 CC studies met the criteria for inclusion. CC had a significantly better outcome than VNS for >50% atonic seizure reduction (80.0% [67.0-90.0%] vs. 54.1% [32.1-75.4%], p<0.05) and for >75% atonic seizure reduction (70.0% [48.05-87.0%] vs. 26.3% [5.8-54.7%], p<0.05). All other seizure types, as well as total number of seizures, showed no statistically significant difference between VNS and CC.
CONCLUSIONS: CC may be more beneficial for LGS patients whose predominant disabling seizure type is atonic. For all other seizure types, VNS offers comparable rates to CC.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app