Focal epilepsies represent approximately half of all diagnoses, and more than one-third of these patients are refractory to pharmacologic treatment. Although resection can result in seizure freedom, many patients do not meet surgical criteria, as seizures may be multifocal in origin or have a focus in an eloquent region of the brain. For these individuals, several U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved electrical stimulation paradigms serve as alternative options, including vagus nerve stimulation, responsive neurostimulation, and stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus. All of these are safe, flexible, and lead to progressive seizure control over time when used as an adjunctive therapy to antiepileptic drugs. Focal epilepsies frequently involve significant comorbidities such as cognitive decline. Similar to antiepilepsy medications and surgical resection, current stimulation targets and parameters have yet to address cognitive impairments directly, with patients reporting persistent comorbidities associated with focal epilepsy despite a significant reduction in the number of their seizures. Although low-frequency theta oscillations of the septohippocampal network are critical for modulating cellular activity and, in turn, cognitive processing, the coordination of neural excitability is also imperative for preventing seizures. In this review, we summarize current FDA-approved electrical stimulation paradigms and propose that theta oscillations of the medial septal nucleus represent a novel neuromodulation target for concurrent seizure reduction and cognitive improvement in epilepsy. Ultimately, further advancements in clinical neurostimulation strategies will allow for the efficient treatment of both seizures and comorbidities, thereby improving overall quality of life for patients with epilepsy.

Objective

Transcranial Focused Ultrasound (tFUS) is a promising new potential neuromodulation tool. However, the safety of tFUS neuromodulation has not yet been assessed adequately. Patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy electing to undergo an anterior temporal lobe resection present a unique opportunity to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tFUS neuromodulation. Histological changes in tissue after tFUS can be examined after surgical resection, while further potential safety concerns can be assessed using neuropsychological testing.

Methods

Neuropsychological functions were assessed in eight patients before and after focused ultrasound sonication of the temporal lobe at intensities up to 5760 mW/cm². Using the BrainSonix Pulsar 1002, tFUS was delivered under MR guidance, using the Siemens Magnetom 3T Prisma scanner. Neuropsychological changes were assessed using various batteries. Histological changes were assessed using hematoxylin and eosin staining, among others.

Results

With respect to safety, the histological analysis did not reveal any detectable damage to the tissue, except for one subject for whom the histology findings were inconclusive. In addition, neuropsychological testing did not show any statistically significant changes in any test, except for a slight decrease in performance on one of the tests after tFUS.

Significance

This study supports the hypothesis that low-intensity Transcranial Focused Ultrasound (tFUS) used for neuromodulation of brain circuits at intensities up to 5760 mW/cm² may be safe for use in human research. However, due to methodological limitations in this study and inconclusive findings, more work is warranted to establish the safety. Future directions include greater number of sonications as well as longer exposure at higher intensity levels to further assess the safety of tFUS for modulation of neuronal circuits.

Objective: To develop a novel software method (AR2) for reducing muscle contamination of ictal scalp electroencephalogram (EEG), and validate this method on the basis of its performance in comparison to a commercially available software method (AR1) to accurately depict seizure-onset location. Methods: A blinded investigation used 23 EEG recordings of seizures from 8 patients. Each recording was uninterpretable with digital filtering because of muscle artifact and processed using AR1 and AR2 and reviewed by 26 EEG specialists. EEG readers assessed seizure-onset time, lateralization, and region, and specified confidence for each determination. The two methods were validated on the basis of the number of readers able to render assignments, confidence, the intra-class correlation (ICC), and agreement with other clinical findings. Results: Among the 23 seizures, two-thirds of the readers were able to delineate seizure-onset time in 10 of 23 using AR1, and 15 of 23 using AR2 (p<0.01). Fewer readers could lateralize seizure-onset (p<0.05). The confidence measures of the assignments were low (probable-unlikely), but increased using AR2 (p<0.05). The ICC for identifying the time of seizure-onset was 0.15 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.11-0.18) using AR1 and 0.26 (95% CI 0.21-0.30) using AR2.  The EEG interpretations were often consistent with behavioral, neurophysiological, and neuro-radiological findings, with left sided assignments correct in 95.9% (CI 85.7-98.9%, n=4) of cases using AR2, and 91.9% (77.0-97.5%) (n=4) of cases using AR1. Conclusions: EEG artifact reduction methods for localizing seizure-onset does not result in high rates of interpretability, reader confidence, and inter-reader agreement. However, the assignments by groups of readers are often congruent with other clinical data. Utilization of the AR2 software method may improve the validity of ictal EEG artifact reduction.