Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To report clinical outcomes of patients who presented with new-onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE), developed drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), and were treated with responsive neurostimulation (RNS).
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients implanted with RNS at our institution and identified three who originally presented with NORSE. Through chart review, we retrieved objective and subjective information related to their presentation, workup, and outcomes including patient-reported seizure frequency. We reviewed electrocorticography (ECoG) data to estimate seizure burden at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months following RNS implantation. We performed a review of literature concerning neurostimulation in NORSE.
RESULTS: Use of RNS to treat DRE following NORSE was associated with reduced seizure burden and informed care by differentiating epileptic from non-epileptic events.
CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center experience of three cases suggests that RNS is a safe and potentially effective treatment for DRE following NORSE.
CONCLUSIONS: This article reports outcomes of the largest case series of NORSE patients treated with RNS. Since patients with NORSE are at high risk of adverse neuropsychiatric and cognitive sequelae beyond seizures, a unique strength of RNS over other surgical options is the ability to distinguish ictal or peri-ictal from non-epileptic events.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients implanted with RNS at our institution and identified three who originally presented with NORSE. Through chart review, we retrieved objective and subjective information related to their presentation, workup, and outcomes including patient-reported seizure frequency. We reviewed electrocorticography (ECoG) data to estimate seizure burden at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months following RNS implantation. We performed a review of literature concerning neurostimulation in NORSE.
RESULTS: Use of RNS to treat DRE following NORSE was associated with reduced seizure burden and informed care by differentiating epileptic from non-epileptic events.
CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center experience of three cases suggests that RNS is a safe and potentially effective treatment for DRE following NORSE.
CONCLUSIONS: This article reports outcomes of the largest case series of NORSE patients treated with RNS. Since patients with NORSE are at high risk of adverse neuropsychiatric and cognitive sequelae beyond seizures, a unique strength of RNS over other surgical options is the ability to distinguish ictal or peri-ictal from non-epileptic events.
摘要：
目的：报告新发难治性癫痫持续状态（NORSE）患者的临床结局，开发的耐药性癫痫（DRE），并接受反应性神经刺激（RNS）治疗。
方法：我们对在我们机构植入RNS的患者进行了回顾性研究，确定了3名最初出现NORSE的患者。通过图表审查，我们检索了与它们的呈现相关的客观和主观信息，workup,结果包括患者报告的癫痫发作频率。我们回顾了皮质脑电图（ECoG）数据，以估计RNS植入后3、6、12和24个月的癫痫发作负担。我们对有关NORSE神经刺激的文献进行了综述。
结果：通过区分癫痫和非癫痫事件，使用RNS治疗NORSE后DRE与减少癫痫发作负担和知情护理相关。
结论：我们对3例病例的单中心经验表明，RNS是NORSE后DRE的安全且潜在有效的治疗方法。
结论：本文报告了接受RNS治疗的最大病例系列NORSE患者的结局。由于NORSE患者除了癫痫发作外，还有很高的神经精神和认知后遗症风险，与其他手术选择相比,RNS的独特优势在于能够区分发作期或发作期与非癫痫性事件.
方法：我们对在我们机构植入RNS的患者进行了回顾性研究，确定了3名最初出现NORSE的患者。通过图表审查，我们检索了与它们的呈现相关的客观和主观信息，workup,结果包括患者报告的癫痫发作频率。我们回顾了皮质脑电图（ECoG）数据，以估计RNS植入后3、6、12和24个月的癫痫发作负担。我们对有关NORSE神经刺激的文献进行了综述。
结果：通过区分癫痫和非癫痫事件，使用RNS治疗NORSE后DRE与减少癫痫发作负担和知情护理相关。
结论：我们对3例病例的单中心经验表明，RNS是NORSE后DRE的安全且潜在有效的治疗方法。
结论：本文报告了接受RNS治疗的最大病例系列NORSE患者的结局。由于NORSE患者除了癫痫发作外，还有很高的神经精神和认知后遗症风险，与其他手术选择相比,RNS的独特优势在于能够区分发作期或发作期与非癫痫性事件.
