Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Epilepsy: The Notre-Dame Hospital Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Retrospective study assessing the efficacy and tolerability of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for the treatment of refractory epilepsy at Notre-Dame Hospital. METHODOLOGY: Chart review of all adult epileptic patients treated by VNS with ≥ 1 year follow-up. Responders were defined as patients with ≥ 50% reduction of baseline seizure frequency. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients (14M; mean age = 29.9 yrs) received a VNS. Sub-pectoralis implantation (n = 25) was more frequent than subcutaneous (n = 9). Most patients suffered from intractable partial epilepsy. After 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, and 36 months, 14/34 patients (41%), 16/34 patients (47%), 17/30 patients (57%) and 12/20 patients (60%) respectively were responders. Two patients (6%) became seizure-free. Complications related to implantation were minor: eight cases of limited cervical hypoesthesia, two minor scar infections and one Horner syndrome. Adverse events (voice hoarseness, throat paresthesia, coughing) related to stimulation were generally mild and tended to wane over time. However, a reduction in seizure frequency did not translate into a reduction in medication, as only 9% of responders had less antiepileptic medication at last follow-up compared to baseline. CONCLUSION: VNS as practiced at Notre-Dame hospital is an efficacious and safe treatment for refractory epilepsy. Quotas allotted to epilepsy centers in the province of Quebec should be lifted or increased to allow more patients to benefit from this therapeutic device.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".