ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2026
Local field potentials for target localization in centromedian deep brain stimulation for epilepsy.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate whether local field potential (LFP) spectral profiles can serve as a candidate "spectral fingerprint" for physiological confirmation of centromedian-parafascicular (CM-Pf) targeting during thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) for drug resistant epilepsy (DRE). Methods: This is a retrospective study of 10 patients (20 leads) who underwent CM-DBS implantation for DRE at a single tertiary center. Postoperative CT and preoperative MRI were co-registered, normalized to the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space, and reconstructed using Lead-DBS software to anatomically localize contacts. BrainSense™ Survey recordings were obtained at least 3 weeks post-implant during routine programming. LFP frequency content was analyzed, and prominent peaks were identified and classified into canonical frequency bands (theta, alpha, beta). These spectral profiles were then mapped to MRI-based anatomical localizations, and statistical tests were applied to assess associations between peak patterns, contact localizations and thalamic subregions. Results: Contacts were distributed as follows: 50 in the CM, 16 in the Parafascicular (Pf), 15 in the Centrolateral, 8 in the Mediodorsal, and 7 in the Ventrolateral (VL) nuclei. Of the 10 representative spectral localizations confined to the CM/CM-Pf region, 8 (80%) displayed a distinct dual-peak spectral profile with peaks in the theta/low alpha (5.5-9 Hz) and high beta (20-30 Hz) bands (mean frequencies: 7.63 Hz and 21.02 Hz, Fisher's exact test, Conclusion: A dual- band candidate spectral pattern consisting of theta/low alpha and high beta peaks was associated with the CM-Pf region in this cohort. This finding provides early evidence supporting the feasibility of incorporating passive LFP recordings as a physiologic marker of target engagement. Future work to prospectively compare bipolar survey-based localization with monopolar recording strategies could enable development of a state-based, physiologically informed spectral atlas to refine CM-Pf targeting in thalamic neuromodulation for DRE.
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.