Erratum: A Retrospective Analysis of Stereoelectroencephalography and Subdural Electroencephalography for Preoperative Evaluation of Intractable Epilepsy

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Different methods for intracranial electrode recording have various advantages and disadvantages, and controversy exists regarding the complications of stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) and subdural EEG. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of SEEG by comparing it with subdural EEG. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Data from 100 patients who underwent SEEG (<i>n</i> = 48) and subdural EEG (<i>n</i> = 52) to evaluate the epileptogenic zone were collected from June 2011 to June 2015. The evaluation results, surgical outcomes, and complications were compared. <b><i>Results:</i></b> No significant differences were noted between the SEEG and subdural EEG groups in identifying the epileptogenic zone or undergoing epileptic surgery. Of the 88 patients who underwent epilepsy surgery after assessment, 59.5% in the SEEG group and 52.2% in the subdural EEG group became seizure free. No significant differences in postoperative seizure control or intelligence improvement were noted. The overall complication rate in SEEG patients (8/48; 16.7%) was lower than that in subdural EEG patients (13/52; 25%), particularly for hemorrhage and infection (4.2 vs. 17.3%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This retrospective review indicates that SEEG has low associated complications, particularly regarding hemorrhage and infection. SEEG is a safe and effective method for intracranial monitoring.