Morbidity Associated With the Use of Intracranial Electrodes for Epilepsy Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Invasive monitoring for the investigation of medically intractable epilepsy may be associated with undesirable morbidity. We performed a review of our recent experience to determine the incidence of major complications. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical records of all patients who underwent invasive EEG monitoring at our institution between 2000 and 2004. RESULTS: One-hundred and sixteen patients (57 males, 59 females) with a mean age of 32 years of age underwent intracranial placement of electrodes for epilepsy surgery investigation. Subdural strips were placed in 115 patients with a mean of eight strips per patient. Subdural grids were inserted in 11 patients and depth electrodes in five. Fourteen of the 15 patients with grids or depth electrodes also had strips. Coverage was unilateral in 37 patients and bilateral in 79 patients. Electrodes were placed over the frontal lobe in 78 cases, temporal in 93, parietal in 24, and occipital in 27 patients. The average duration of investigation was 12.3 days (range 3-29). The evaluation led to the performance of a surgical resection in 85 patients (74%). Complications were seen in four patients with subdural strips (3%), and in two patients with grids (13%), characterized by clinical infection, intracranial hemorrhage, aseptic meningitis, transient neurological deficits, and status epilepticus. Mortality was nil. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with previously published literature on the topic, the major complication rate in this group of patients appears to be low.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".