Medial pulvinar stimulation for focal drug-resistant epilepsy: interim 12-month results of the PULSE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the medial pulvinar nucleus (PuM) in reducing seizure frequency and addressing comorbidities in patients with drug and vagal nerve-resistant focal epilepsy. Methods This is an open-label prospective treatment trial with a planned enrollment of 12 patients suffering from medically refractory epilepsy (Clinical trial gov NCT04692701), for which the interim 12-month post-implantation results for the first 6 patients are being reported. Inclusion criteria were focal epilepsy not suitable for or after failed surgical intervention and previous failure of neurostimulation therapies (vagus nerve stimulation or anterior thalamic nucleus DBS). Evaluations included seizure diaries, neuropsychological assessments, and scales for depression, anxiety, quality of life, and seizure severity. PuM DBS was performed using ROSA robotic assistance, with follow-ups every 3 months for 1 year. Results Out of six patients, five completed 1-year follow-up (one patient died prematurely). A non-significant trend toward seizure reduction was observed at 6 months, becoming more pronounced at 1 year (mean reduction: 45%; responders: 2/5). Seizure severity significantly improved ( p = 0.02), with a reduction in the NHS3 scale scores. Quality of life improved significantly at 1 year ( p = 0.03). Psychiatric assessments indicated a non-significant trend toward improvement in depression (mean improvement: 26%) and anxiety (mean improvement: 20%) scores. Neuropsychological testing showed stable or improved cognitive performance in three out of five patients. Adverse events included one case of cerebral hemorrhage, one infection leading to device removal, and one possible SUDEP. Significance Preliminary results suggest that PuM DBS may offer a promising therapeutic option for reducing seizure severity and improving quality of life and cognitive functions in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Despite the small sample size and the presence of serious adverse events, the findings warrant further investigation with larger cohorts to confirm these trends and optimize the treatment protocol.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".