Background: Identifying patients with intractable epilepsy who would benefit from therapeutic chronic vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) preoperatively remains a major clinical challenge. We have developed a statistical model for predicting VNS efficacy using only routine preimplantation electroencephalogram (EEG) recorded with the TruScan EEG device (Brazdil et al., 2019). It remains to be seen, however, if this model can be applied in different clinical settings. Objective: To validate our model using EEG data acquired with a different recording system. Methods: We identified a validation cohort of eight patients implanted with VNS, whose preimplantation EEG was recorded on the BrainScope device and who underwent the EEG recording according to the protocol. The classifier developed in our earlier work, named Pre-X-Stim, was then employed to classify these patients as predicted responders or non-responders based on the dynamics in EEG power spectra. Predicted and real-world outcomes were compared to establish the applicability of this classifier. In total, two validation experiments were performed using two different validation approaches (single classifier or classifier voting). Results: The classifier achieved 75% accuracy, 67% sensitivity, and 100% specificity. Only two patients, both real-life responders, were classified incorrectly in both validation experiments. Conclusion: We have validated the Pre-X-Stim model on EEGs from a different recording system, which indicates its application under different technical conditions. Our approach, based on preoperative EEG, is easily applied and financially undemanding and presents great potential for real-world clinical use.

Behavioral and Social Neuroscience Research Group Central European Institute of Technology Masaryk University Brno Czechia

Brno Epilepsy Center Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery St Anne's University Hospital and Medical Faculty of Masaryk University Brno Czechia

Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University Brno Czechia

Institute of Scientific Instruments of the Czech Academy of Sciences Brno Czechia

See more in PubMed

Babajani-Feremi A., Noorizadeh N., Mudigoudar B., Wheless J. W. (2018). Predicting seizure outcome of vagus nerve stimulation using MEG-based network topology. NeuroImage Clin. 19 990–999. 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.06.017 PubMed DOI PMC

Brazdil M., Dolezalova I., Koritakova E., Chladek J., Roman R., Pail M., et al. (2019). EEG reactivity predicts individual efficacy of vagal nerve stimulation in intractable epileptics. Front. Neurol. 10:392. 10.3389/fneur.2019.00392 PubMed DOI PMC

Button K. S., Ioannidis J. P. A., Mokrysz C., Nosek B. A., Flint J., Robinson E. S. J., et al. (2013). Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 14 365–376. 10.1038/nrn3475 PubMed DOI

Englot D. J., Chang E. F., Auguste K. I. (2011). Vagus nerve stimulation for epilepsy: a meta-analysis of efficacy and predictors of response. J. Neurosurg. 115 1248–1255. 10.3171/2011.7.JNS11977 PubMed DOI

Englot D. J., Rolston J. D., Wright C. W., Hassnain K. H., Chang E. F. (2016). Rates and predictors of seizure freedom with vagus nerve stimulation for intractable epilepsy. Neurosurgery 79 345–353. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001165 PubMed DOI PMC

Frahm J., Bruhn H., Merboldt K.-D., Hanicke W. (1992). Dynamic MR imaging of human brain oxygenation during rest and photic stimulation. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2 501–505. 10.1002/jmri.1880020505 PubMed DOI

Guaranha M. S. B., Garzon E., Buchpiguel C. A., Tazima S., Yacubian E. M. T., Sakamoto A. C. (2005). Hyperventilation revisited: physiological effects and efficacy on focal seizure activation in the era of video-EEG monitoring. Epilepsia 46 69–75. 10.1111/j.0013-9580.2005.11104.x PubMed DOI

Hedera P., Wu D., Collins S., Lewin J. S., Miller D., Lerner A. J., et al. (1998). Sex and electroencephalographic synchronization after photic stimulation predict signal changes in the visual cortex on functional MR images. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 19 853–857. PubMed PMC

Ibrahim G. M., Sharma P., Hyslop A., Guillen M. R., Morgan B. R., Wong S., et al. (2017). Presurgical thalamocortical connectivity is associated with response to vagus nerve stimulation in children with intractable epilepsy. NeuroImage Clin. 16 634–642. 10.1016/j.nicl.2017.09.015 PubMed DOI PMC

Kennealy J. A., Penovich P. E., Moore Nease S. E. (1986). EEG and spectral analysis in acute hyperventilation. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neuropsychiol. 63 98–106. 10.1016/0013-4694(86)90002-7 PubMed DOI

McHugh J. C., Singh H. W., Phillips J., Murphy K., Doherty C. P., Delanty N. (2007). Outcome measurement after vagal nerve stimulation therapy: proposal of a new classification. Epilepsia 48 375–378. 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2006.00931.x PubMed DOI

Mithani K., Mikhail M., Morgan B. R., Wong S., Weil A. G., Deschenes S., et al. (2019). Connectomic profiling identifies responders to vagus nerve stimulation. Ann. Neurol. 86 743–753. 10.1002/ana.25574 PubMed DOI

Panebianco M., Rigby A., Weston J., Marson A. G. (2015). Vagus nerve stimulation for partial seizures. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2015:CD002896. PubMed PMC

Entropy in scalp EEG can be used as a preimplantation marker for VNS efficacy

Prediction of Vagal Nerve Stimulation Efficacy in Drug-Resistant Epilepsy (PRECISE): Prospective Study for Pre-implantation Prediction/Study Design