The actual use of directional steering and shorter pulse width in selected patients undergoing deep brain stimulation

Introduction: Directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) and pulse with <60 mu s increase side-effects threshold, enlarging the therapeutic window. However, new systems allowing these advanced features are more expensive and often available only for a limited number of patients in some centers. It is unknown how many and which DBS patients actually need the advanced features because of an insufficient improvement with standard parameters. Methods: We included in the analysis all patients with Parkinson's disease, dystonia and tremor who were selected to receive implantation of advanced DBS systems based on specific preoperative or intraoperative clinical features. Results: After a median follow-up of 15 months, 54.9% of the 51 patients implanted with directional leads were using the advanced features in one or both leads (n = 42 leads, 42%), meaning these leads were programmed either with directional stimulation (n = 9, 9%), a shorter pw (n = 20, 20%) or both (n = 13, 13%). This included 92% of patients implanted in the Vim, 44% of those implanted in the STN, and 40% of those implanted in the GPi. Conclusions: DBS systems with advanced features may be particularly indicated for selected patients based on some clinical characteristics and the chosen target. This data may help clinicians allocate resources in a more informed way.Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie

Intraoperative vs. postoperative side-effects-thresholds during pallidal and thalamic DBS

Background: It is currently unknown whether results from intraoperative test stimulation of two types of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS), either during awake pallidal (GPi) or thalamic (Vim), are comparable to the results generated by chronic stimulation through the definitive lead.Objective: To determine whether side-effects-thresholds from intraoperative test stimulation are indicative of postoperative stimulation findings.Methods: Records of consecutive patients who received GPi or Vim were analyzed. Thresholds for the induction of either capsular or non-capsular side-effects were compared at matched depths and at group-level.Results: Records of fifty-two patients were analyzed (20 GPis, 75 Vims). The induction of side-effects was not significantly different between intraoperative and postoperative assessments at matched depths, although a large variability was observed (capsular: GPi DBS: p = 0.79; Vim DBS: p = 0.68); non-capsular: GPi DBS: p = 0.20; and Vim DBS: p = 0.35). Linear mixed-effect models revealed no differences between intraoperative and postoperative assessments, although the Vim had significantly lower thresholds (capsular side-effects p = 0.01, non-capsular side-effects p < 0.01). Unpaired survival analyses demonstrated lower intraoperative than postoperative thresholds for capsular side-effects in patients under GPi DBS (p = 0.01), while higher intraoperative thresholds for non-capsular side-effects in patients under Vim DBS (p = 0.01).Conclusion: There were no significant differences between intraoperative and postoperative assessments of GPi and Vim DBS, although thresholds cannot be directly extrapolated at an individual level due to high variability.Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie

Medical and surgical treatment for medication-induced tremor: case report and systematic review

Objective To present a case of refractory medication-induced tremor successfully treated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the thalamic ventral intermediate nucleus (Vim) and to propose a medical and surgical treatment algorithm based on a systematical review of the literature. Methods Patient data were retrospectively collected. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Subjective and objective data were pooled for analysis by classifying them into 5 predefined categories(no, minimal, moderate, good, and excellent effects). Results The patient presented with lithium-induced bilateral progressive hand tremor lasting 25 years. After DBS, he reported excellent tremor suppression until the last follow-up (36 months after Vim-DBS). For the review, 34 of 140 studies were included and evaluated (178 unique subjects, 31 different treatments). A good-to-excellent tremor suppression (50%-100%) in at least 50% of subjects was achieved using propranolol (12 studies, 50% of 56 subjects), tetrabenazine (5 studies, 51% of 13 subjects), and metoprolol (4 studies, 75% of 8 subjects). The effect of benztropine and diphenhydramine was none or only minimal to moderate (up to 50% improvement; both: 3 studies, 50% of 4 patients). One article reported minimal-to-moderate effectiveness after DBS of the ventral oral posterior nucleus of the thalamus. Methods were highly heterogeneous. All studies scored grade III or IV quality of evidence, which was insufficient for recommendations (level U). Conclusion Treatment decision making should be performed on a case-by-case basis considering the low level of evidence, and we propose a practically oriented treatment algorithm. Propranolol, tetrabenazine, and metoprolol might be effective. For selected and refractory cases, DBS might be considered.Neurological Motor Disorder

Predicting motor outcome and quality of life after subthalamic deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease: the role of standard screening measures and wearable data

Background:Standardized screening for subthalamic deep brain stimulation (STN DBS) in Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients is crucial to determine eligibility, but its utility to predict postoperative outcomes in eligible patients is inconclusive. It is unknown whether wearable data can contribute to this aim.Objective:To evaluate the utility of universal components incorporated in the DBS screening, complemented by a wearable sensor, to predict motor outcomes and Quality of life (QoL) one year after STN DBS surgery.Methods:Consecutive patients were included in the OPTIMIST cohort study from two DBS centers. Standardized assessments included a preoperative Levodopa Challenge Test (LCT), and questionnaires on QoL and non-motor symptoms including cognition, psychiatric symptoms, impulsiveness, autonomic symptoms, and sleeping problems. Moreover, an ambulatory wearable sensor (Parkinson Kinetigraph (PKG)) was used. Postoperative assessments were similar and also included a Stimulation Challenge Test to determine DBS effects on motor function.Results:Eighty-three patients were included (median (interquartile range) age 63 (56–68) years, 36% female). Med-OFF (Stim-OFF) motor severity deteriorated indicating disease progression, but patients significantly improved in terms of Med-ON (Stim-ON) motor function, motor fluctuations, QoL, and most non-motor domains. Motor outcomes were not predicted by preoperative tests, including covariates of either LCT or PKG. Postoperative QoL was predicted by better preoperative QoL, lower age, and more preoperative impulsiveness scores in multivariate models.Conclusion:Data from the DBS screening including wearable data do not predict postoperative motor outcome at one year. Post-DBS QoL appears primarily driven by non-motor symptoms, rather than by motor improvement.Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie

Stimulation challenge test after STN DBS improves satisfaction in Parkinson's disease patients

Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie

Intraoperative test stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus aids postoperative programming of chronic stimulation settings in Parkinson's disease

Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie