ArticleJournal of neurosurgery. Case lessons2026
Inpatient continuous thalamic stereo-electroencephalography stimulation in the evaluation of focal epilepsy: illustrative case.
Article in Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) who are not candidates for resective surgery, thalamic neuromodulation targeting structures such as the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT), centromedian nucleus (CM), and pulvinar (PUL) has emerged as a promising therapy. The clinical investigation of these targets' efficacy and side effect profiles is ongoing, complicating discussions between neurosurgeons, neurologists, and patients. The implementation of single-pulse and continuous stimulation protocols to conduct patient-specific side effect screens and generate prognostic biomarkers could offer guidance for target selection. OBSERVATIONS: A 32-year-old male with extensive polymicrogyria and DRE underwent stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) with multisite thalamic sampling to inform neuromodulation target selection. Single-pulse stimulation was conducted to screen for acute sensorimotor effects, followed by continuous (12- to 24-hour) stimulation using clinically relevant parameters. Intolerable paresthesia occurred during CM single-pulse stimulation, leading to its exclusion as a target. Single-pulse and continuous stimulation of the ANT and PUL were well tolerated. PUL stimulation offered superior suppression of epileptiform discharges during sleep. LESSONS: These findings meaningfully informed the selection of the PUL as a neuromodulation target. This case illustrates the safety, feasibility, and utility of patient-specific single-pulse and continuous stimulation assessments during SEEG monitoring to evaluate efficacy and tolerability prior to chronic neuromodulation, particularly for novel thalamic targets. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE25947.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.