| Title |
Responsive Cortical Stimulation for the Treatment of Epilepsy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neurotherapeutics, January 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.nurt.2007.10.069 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Felice T. Sun, Martha J. Morrell, Robert E. Wharen |
| Abstract |
Epilepsy is a common chronic neurological disorder affecting approximately 1-2% of the population. Despite the available treatment options (pharmacotherapy, surgery, and vagus nerve stimulation), a large percentage of patients continue to have seizures. With the success of deep brain stimulation for treatment of movement disorders, brain stimulation has received renewed attention as a potential treatment option for epilepsy. Responsive stimulation aims to suppress epileptiform activity by delivering stimulation directly in response to electrographic activity. Animal and human data support the concept that responsive stimulation can abort epileptiform activity, and this modality may be a safe and effective treatment option for epilepsy. Responsive stimulation has the advantage of specificity. In contrast to the typically systemic administration of pharmacotherapy, with the concomitant possibility of side effects, electrical stimulation can be targeted to the specific brain regions involved in the seizure. In addition, responsive stimulation provides temporal specificity. Treatment is provided as needed, potentially reducing the likelihood of functional disruption or habituation due to continuous treatment. Here we review current animal and human research in responsive brain stimulation for epilepsy and then discuss the NeuroPace RNS System, an investigational implantable responsive neurostimulator system that is being evaluated in a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded trial to assess the safety and efficacy of responsive stimulation for the treatment of medically refractory epilepsy. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 14 | 5% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 254 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 68 | 25% |
| Researcher | 46 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 57 | 21% |
| Unknown | 36 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 65 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 23% |
| Neuroscience | 33 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 30 | 11% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 29 | 11% |
| Unknown | 47 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2024.
All research outputs
#4,191,555
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#454
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,674
of 168,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 168,387 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.