% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Vassileva:844795,
      author       = {Vassileva, Albena and van Blooijs, Dorien and Leijten,
                      Frans and Huiskamp, Geertjan},
      title        = {{N}eocortical electrical stimulation for epilepsy:
                      {C}losed-loop versus open-loop},
      journal      = {Epilepsy research},
      volume       = {141},
      issn         = {0920-1211},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier89326},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2018-02171},
      pages        = {95 - 101},
      year         = {2018},
      abstract     = {The aim of this review is to evaluate whether open-loop or
                      closed-loop neocortical electrical stimulation should be the
                      preferred approach to manage seizures in intractable
                      epilepsy.Twenty cases of open-loop neocortical stimulation
                      with an implanted device have been reported, in 5 case
                      studies. Closed-loop stimulation with an implanted device
                      has been investigated in a larger number of patients in the
                      RNS System clinical trials. With 230 patients enrolled at
                      the start of the Long-term Treatment Trial, 115 remained at
                      the last reported follow-up. Open-loop stimulation reduced
                      seizure frequency in patients on average with over $90\%$
                      compared to baseline. Closed-loop stimulation reduces
                      seizure frequency with $60\%–65\%.Even$ though open-loop
                      neocortical electrical stimulation has only been reported in
                      20 patients, and closed-loop in much a larger sample,
                      evidence suggests that both approaches are effective in
                      reducing seizures. It remains an open question which should
                      be clinically preferred. Therefore, a head-to-head adaptive
                      clinical study comparing both approaches is proposed},
      cin          = {INM-3 / INM-7},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406},
      pnm          = {572 - (Dys-)function and Plasticity (POF3-572)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-572},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:29547789},
      UT           = {WOS:000430781700013},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2018.02.010},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/844795},
}