Abstract
Introduction
The most widely used neuro-stimulation treatment for drug-resistant epilepsy is Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) Therapy®. Ictal tachycardia can be an indicator of a seizure and, if monitored, can be used to trigger an additional on-demand stimulation, which may positively influence seizure severity or duration. A new VNS Therapy generator model, AspireSR®, was introduced and approved for CE Mark in February 2014. In enhancement of former models, the AspireSR has incorporated a cardiac-based seizure-detection (CBSD) algorithm that can detect ictal tachycardia and automatically trigger a defined auto-stimulation. To evaluate differences in preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative handling, we compared the AspireSR to a conventional generator model (Demipulse®).
Method
Between February and September 2014, seven patients with drug-resistant epilepsy and ictal tachycardia were implanted with an AspireSR. Between November 2013 and September 2014, seven patients were implanted with a Demipulse and served as control group. Operation time, skin incision length and position, and complications were recorded. Handling of the new device was critically evaluated.
Results
The intraoperative handling was comparable and did not lead to a significant increase in operation time. In our 14 operations, we had no significant short-term complications. Due to its larger size, patients with the AspireSR had significantly larger skin incisions. For optimal heart rate detection, the AspireSR had to be placed significantly more medial in the décolleté area than the Demipulse. The preoperative testing is a unique addition to the implantation procedure of the AspireSR, which may provide minor difficulties, and for which we provide several recommendations and tips. The price of the device is higher than for all other models.
Conclusions
The new AspireSR generator offers a unique technical improvement over the previous Demipulse. Whether the highly interesting CBSD feature will provide an additional benefit for the patients, and will rectify the additional costs, respectively, cannot be answered in the short-term. The preoperative handling is straightforward, provided that certain recommendations are taken into consideration. The intraoperative handling is equivalent to former models—except for the placement of the generator, which might cause cosmetic issues and has to be discussed with the patient carefully. We recommend the consideration of the AspireSR in patients with documented ictal tachycardia to provide a substantial number of patients for later seizure outcome analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boon P, Vonck K, De Reuck J, Caemaert J (2001) Vagus nerve stimulation for refractory epilepsy. Seizure 10(6):448–455
Boon P, Vonck K, Van Walleghem P, D’Havé M, Goossens L, Vandekerckhove T, Caemaert J, De Reuck J (2001) Programmed and magnet-induced vagus nerve stimulation for refractory epilepsy. J Clin Neurophysiol 18(5):402–407
Eggleston KS, Olin BD, Fisher RS (2014) Ictal tachycardia: the head-heart connection. Seizure 23:496-505
Fisher RS, Eggleston KS, Wright CW (2014) Vagus nerve stimulation magnet activation for seizures: a critical review. Acta Neurol Scand 131:1-8
Kwan P, Brodie MJ (2000) Early identification of refractory epilepsy. N Engl J Med 342(5):314–319
Leutmezer F, Schernthaner C, Lurger S, Pötzelberger K, Baumgartner C (2003) Electrocardiographic changes at the onset of epileptic seizures. Epilepsia 44(3):348–354
Majkowska-Zwolińska B, Zwoliński P, Roszkowski M, Drabik K (2012) Long-term results of vagus nerve stimulation in children and adolescents with drug-resistant epilepsy. Childs Nerv Syst 28(4):621–628
Mohanraj R, Brodie MJ (2006) Diagnosing refractory epilepsy: response to sequential treatment schedules. Eur J Neurol 13(3):277–282
Morris GL (2003) A retrospective analysis of the effects of magnet-activated stimulation in conjunction with vagus nerve stimulation therapy. Epilepsy Behav 4(6):740–745
Moseley BD, Nickels K, Britton J, Wirrell E (2010) How common is ictal hypoxemia and bradycardia in children with partial complex and generalized convulsive seizures? Epilepsia 51(7):1219–1224
Wang H, Chen X, Lin Z, Shao Z, Sun B, Shen H, Liu L (2009) Long-term effect of vagus nerve stimulation on interictal epileptiform discharges in refractory epilepsy. J Neurol Sci 284(1–2):96–102
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Ulf C. Schneider and Katrin Bohlmann contributed equally to this work
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schneider, U.C., Bohlmann, K., Vajkoczy, P. et al. Implantation of a new Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) Therapy® generator, AspireSR®: considerations and recommendations during implantation and replacement surgery—comparison to a traditional system. Acta Neurochir 157, 721–728 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2362-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2362-3