Contemporaneous evaluation of patient experience, surgical strategy, and seizure outcomes in patients undergoing stereoelectroencephalography or subdural electrode monitoring. (25th November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kim, Lily H.; Parker, Jonathon J.; Ho, Allen L.; Feng, Austin Y.; Kumar, Kevin K.; Chen, Kevin S.; Ojukwu, Disep I.; Shuer, Lawrence M.; Grant, Gerald A.; Graber, Kevin D.; Halpern, Casey H.
• Is Part Of: Epilepsia. Volume 62:issue 1(2021)
• Page Start: 74
• Page End: 84
• Publication Date: 2020-11-25
• Subjects: epilepsy -- invasive EEG -- phase 2 monitoring -- stereoencephalography -- subdural; Epilepsy -- Periodicals; 616.853
• DOI: 10.1111/epi.16762
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0013-9580

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: Intracranial electrographic localization of the seizure onset zone (SOZ) can guide surgical approaches for medically refractory epilepsy patients, especially when the presurgical workup is discordant or functional cortical mapping is required. Minimally invasive stereotactic placement of depth electrodes, stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG), has garnered increasing use, but limited data exist to evaluate its postoperative outcomes in the context of the contemporaneous availability of both SEEG and subdural electrode (SDE) monitoring. We aimed to assess the patient experience, surgical intervention, and seizure outcomes associated with these two epileptic focus mapping techniques during a period of rapid adoption of neuromodulatory and ablative epilepsy treatments. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 66 consecutive adult intracranial electrode monitoring cases at our institution between 2014 and 2017. Monitoring was performed with either SEEG (n = 47) or SDEs (n = 19). Results: Both groups had high rates of SOZ identification (SEEG 91.5%, SDE 88.2%, P = .69). The majority of patients achieved Engel class I (SEEG 29.3%, SDE 35.3%) or II outcomes (SEEG 31.7%, SDE 29.4%) after epilepsy surgery, with no significant difference between groups ( P = .79). SEEG patients reported lower median pain scores ( P = .03) and required less narcotic pain medication (median = 94.5 vs 594.6 milligram morphine equivalents, P = .0003). Both groups had low rates of symptomatic hemorrhage (SEEG 0%, SDE 5.3%, P = .11). On multivariate logistic regression, undergoing resection or ablation (vs responsive neurostimulation/vagus nerve stimulation) was the only significant independent predictor of a favorable outcome (adjusted odds ratio = 25.4, 95% confidence interval = 3.48‐185.7, P = .001). Significance: Although both SEEG and SDE monitoring result in favorable seizure control, SEEG has the advantage of superior pain control, decreased narcotic usage, and lack of routine need for intensive care unit stay. Despite a heterogenous collection of epileptic semiologies, seizure outcome was associated with the therapeutic surgical modality and not the intracranial monitoring technique. The potential for an improved postoperative experience makes SEEG a promising method for intracranial electrode monitoring.