Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 review

Corpus callosotomy in Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: Effectiveness, safety, and predictors of outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

0Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
3Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a severe, drug-resistant developmental and epileptic encephalopathy for which corpus callosotomy (CC) can be a particularly effective option for seizure control. However, this benefit must be weighed against the tradeoff of permanent corpus callosum disconnection. Although use of CC declined with the rise of neuromodulation, interest has resurged with minimally invasive techniques, including laser interstitial thermal therapy and endoscope-assisted approaches. However, updated LGS-specific outcomes following CC have not been systematically synthesized across surgical approaches and age groups. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD420261381787) adhering PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, OVID/MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to March 2026. The primary outcome was ≥ 50% seizure reduction. Secondary outcomes included ≥ 75% reduction, seizure freedom, complication rates, and non-seizure outcomes. Pre-specified subgroup analyses evaluated extent of disconnection and approach (open vs laser vs endoscopic). Meta-regression assessed age at surgery, age at seizure onset, follow-up duration, extent and approach of surgery. We also performed sensitivity analyses excluding high-bias or influential studies, assessed publication bias, and graded certainty of evidence. RESULTS: After screening 1235 articles, 48 (822 patients; 46 retrospective, 2 prospective; no randomized trials) studies from 19 countries were included. The pooled ≥ 50% responder rate was 69.6% (95% CI: 63.1-75.5%; I² = 24.1%; k = 48). The ≥ 75% responder rate was 38.2% (95% CI: 29.8-47.4%; I² = 62.9%; k = 47), and seizure freedom was 20.4% (95% CI: 16.0-25.7%; I² = 0.6%; k = 20). No significant differences were observed by extent or approach. In meta-regression, older age at surgery was the only significant independent predictor of ≥ 50% response in the multivariable model (β = 0.045; p = 0.020). Non-seizure outcomes were limited and qualitatively synthesized. The pooled proportion of complications was 15.8% (95% CI, 10.4% - 23.2%). No publication bias was detected, though all outcomes carried very low certainty ratings. SIGNIFICANCE: CC achieves ≥ 50% seizure reduction in ~70% of LGS patients. Outcomes were not influenced by surgical extent or approach. Evidence is limited to observational studies with very low certainty, highlighting the need for prospective, standardized, multicenter data.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Corpus callosotomy in Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: Effectiveness, safety, and predictors of outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Date Crossref
01/11/2026
Éditeur
Elsevier BV
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Epilepsy research and treatmentFetal and Pediatric Neurological DisordersNeonatal and fetal brain pathology

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.