Increased number of TH-immunoreactive cells in the ventral tegmental area after deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus

2014 ◽  
Vol 220 (5) ◽  
pp. 3061-3066 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. D. Dela Cruz ◽  
S. Hescham ◽  
B. Adriaanse ◽  
F. L. Campos ◽  
H. W. M. Steinbusch ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. E5 ◽  
Author(s):  
James J. Zhou ◽  
Tsinsue Chen ◽  
S. Harrison Farber ◽  
Andrew G. Shetter ◽  
Francisco A. Ponce

OBJECTIVEThe field of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for epilepsy has grown tremendously since its inception in the 1970s and 1980s. The goal of this review is to identify and evaluate all studies published on the topic of open-loop DBS for epilepsy over the past decade (2008 to present).METHODSA PubMed search was conducted to identify all articles reporting clinical outcomes of open-loop DBS for the treatment of epilepsy published since January 1, 2008. The following composite search terms were used: (“epilepsy” [MeSH] OR “seizures” [MeSH] OR “kindling, neurologic” [MeSH] OR epilep* OR seizure* OR convuls*) AND (“deep brain stimulation” [MeSH] OR “deep brain stimulation” OR “DBS”) OR (“electric stimulation therapy” [MeSH] OR “electric stimulation therapy” OR “implantable neurostimulators” [MeSH]).RESULTSThe authors identified 41 studies that met the criteria for inclusion. The anterior nucleus of the thalamus, centromedian nucleus of the thalamus, and hippocampus were the most frequently evaluated targets. Among the 41 articles, 19 reported on stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus, 6 evaluated stimulation of the centromedian nucleus of the thalamus, and 9 evaluated stimulation of the hippocampus. The remaining 7 articles reported on the evaluation of alternative DBS targets, including the posterior hypothalamus, subthalamic nucleus, ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus, nucleus accumbens, caudal zone incerta, mammillothalamic tract, and fornix. The authors evaluated each study for overall epilepsy response rates as well as adverse events and other significant, nonepilepsy outcomes.CONCLUSIONSLevel I evidence supports the safety and efficacy of stimulating the anterior nucleus of the thalamus and the hippocampus for the treatment of medically refractory epilepsy. Level III and IV evidence supports stimulation of other targets for epilepsy. Ongoing research into the efficacy, adverse effects, and mechanisms of open-loop DBS continues to expand the knowledge supporting the use of these treatment modalities in patients with refractory epilepsy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim A. M. Bouwens van der Vlis ◽  
Olaf E. M. G. Schijns ◽  
Frédéric L. W. V. J. Schaper ◽  
Govert Hoogland ◽  
Pieter Kubben ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e0160750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Maarouf ◽  
Clemens Neudorfer ◽  
Faycal El Majdoub ◽  
Doris Lenartz ◽  
Jens Kuhn ◽  
...  

Brain ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 139 (10) ◽  
pp. 2631-2640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Miller ◽  
Harith Akram ◽  
Susie Lagrata ◽  
Marwan Hariz ◽  
Ludvic Zrinzo ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 153 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Chi Wang ◽  
Sanjeet S. Grewal ◽  
Erik H. Middlebrooks ◽  
Gregory A. Worrell ◽  
Matt Stead ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (10) ◽  
pp. 2548-2554
Author(s):  
Virgilio Gerald H. Evidente ◽  
Francisco A. Ponce ◽  
Maris H. Evidente ◽  
Robin Garrett ◽  
Margaret Lambert

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina V. Torres ◽  
Guillermo Blasco ◽  
Marta Navas García ◽  
Elena Ezquiaga ◽  
Jesús Pastor ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEInitial studies applying deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the posteromedial hypothalamus (PMH) to patients with pathological aggressiveness have yielded encouraging results. However, the anatomical structures involved in its therapeutic effect have not been precisely identified. The authors’ objective was to describe the long-term outcome in their 7-patient series, and the tractography analysis of the volumes of tissue activated in 2 of the responders.METHODSThis was a retrospective study of 7 subjects with pathological aggressiveness. The findings on MRI with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in 2 of the responders were analyzed. The authors generated volumes of tissue activated according to the parameters used, and selected those volumes as regions of interest to delineate the tracts affected by stimulation.RESULTSThe series consisted of 5 men and 2 women. Of the 7 patients, 5 significantly improved with stimulation. The PMH, ventral tegmental area, dorsal longitudinal fasciculus, and medial forebrain bundle seem to be involved in the stimulation field.CONCLUSIONSIn this series, 5 of 7 medication-resistant patients with severe aggressiveness who were treated with bilateral PMH DBS showed a significant long-lasting improvement. The PMH, ventral tegmental area, dorsal longitudinal fasciculus, and medial forebrain bundle seem to be in the stimulation field and might be responsible for the therapeutic effect of DBS.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document