Accuracy of Markerless 3D Motion Capture Evaluation to Differentiate between On/Off Status in Parkinson’s Disease after Deep Brain Stimulation

Background. Body motion evaluation (BME) by markerless systems is increasingly being considered as an alternative to traditional marker-based technology because they are faster, simpler, and less expensive. They are increasingly used in clinical settings in patients with movement disorders; however, the wide variety of systems available makes results conflicting. Research Question. The objective of this study was to determine whether a markerless 3D motion capture system is a useful instrument to objectively differentiate between PD patients with DBS in On and Off states and controls and its correlation with the evaluation by means of MDS-UPDRS. Methods. Six PD patients who underwent deep brain stimulation (DBS) bilaterally in the subthalamic nucleus were evaluated using BME and the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III) with DBS turned On and Off. BME of 16 different movements in six controls paired by age and sex was compared with that in PD patients with DBS in On and Off states. Results. A better performance in the BME was correlated with a lower UPDRS-III score. There was no statistically significant difference between patients in Off and On states of DBS regarding BME. However, some items such as left shoulder flexion (p=0.038), right shoulder rotation (p=0.011), and left trunk rotation (p=0.023) were different between Off patients and healthy controls. Significance. Kinematic data obtained with this markerless system could contribute to discriminate between PD patients and healthy controls. This emerging technology may help to clinically evaluate PD patients more objectively.

Download Full-text

Exploring the effects of deep brain stimulation and vision on tremor in Parkinson’s disease - benefits from objective methods

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation ◽

10.1186/s12984-020-00677-3 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Per-Anders Fransson ◽

Maria H. Nilsson ◽

Diederick C. Niehorster ◽

Marcus Nyström ◽

Stig Rehncrona ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Motion Capture ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

The Body ◽

Motion Capture System ◽

3D Motion ◽

3D Motion Capture ◽

Deep Brain

Abstract Background Tremor is a cardinal symptom of Parkinson’s disease (PD) that may cause severe disability. As such, objective methods to determine the exact characteristics of the tremor may improve the evaluation of therapy. This methodology study aims to validate the utility of two objective technical methods of recording Parkinsonian tremor and evaluate their ability to determine the effects of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus and of vision. Methods We studied 10 patients with idiopathic PD, who were responsive to L-Dopa and had more than 1 year use of bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation. The patients did not have to display visible tremor to be included in the study. Tremor was recorded with two objective methods, a force platform and a 3 dimensional (3D) motion capture system that tracked movements in four key proximal sections of the body (knee, hip, shoulder and head). They were assessed after an overnight withdrawal of anti-PD medications with DBS ON and OFF and with eyes open and closed during unperturbed and perturbed stance with randomized calf vibration, using a randomized test order design. Results Tremor was detected with the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) in 6 of 10 patients but only distally (hands and feet) with DBS OFF. With the force platform and the 3D motion capture system, tremor was detected in 6 of 10 and 7 of 10 patients respectively, mostly in DBS OFF but also with DBS ON in some patients. The 3D motion capture system revealed that more than one body section was usually affected by tremor and that the tremor amplitude was non-uniform, but the frequency almost identical, across sites. DBS reduced tremor amplitude non-uniformly across the body. Visual input mostly reduced tremor amplitude with DBS ON. Conclusions Technical recording methods offer objective and sensitive detection of tremor that provide detailed characteristics such as peak amplitude, frequency and distribution pattern, and thus, provide information that can guide the optimization of treatments. Both methods detected the effects of DBS and visual input but the 3D motion system was more versatile in that it could detail the presence and properties of tremor at individual body sections.

Download Full-text

Awake versus asleep deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease: a critical comparison and meta-analysis

Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry ◽

10.1136/jnnp-2016-314500 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 89 (7) ◽

pp. 687-691 ◽

Cited By ~ 35

Author(s):

Allen L Ho ◽

Rohaid Ali ◽

Ian D Connolly ◽

Jaimie M Henderson ◽

Rohit Dhall ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Side Effects ◽

General Anaesthesia ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Deep Brain

ObjectiveNo definitive comparative studies of the efficacy of ‘awake’ deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson’s disease (PD) under local or general anaesthesia exist, and there remains significant debate within the field regarding differences in outcomes between these two techniques.MethodsWe conducted a literature review and meta-analysis of all published DBS for PD studies (n=2563) on PubMed from January 2004 to November 2015. Inclusion criteria included patient number >15, report of precision and/or clinical outcomes data, and at least 6 months of follow-up. There were 145 studies, 16 of which were under general anaesthesia. Data were pooled using an inverse-variance weighted, random effects meta-analytic model for observational data.ResultsThere was no significant difference in mean target error between local and general anaesthesia, but there was a significantly less mean number of DBS lead passes with general anaesthesia (p=0.006). There were also significant decreases in DBS complications, with fewer intracerebral haemorrhages and infections with general anaesthesia (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Section II scores off medication, UPDRS III scores off and on medication or levodopa equivalent doses between the two techniques. Awake DBS cohorts had a significantly greater decrease in treatment-related side effects as measured by the UPDRS IV off medication score (78.4% awake vs 59.7% asleep, p=0.022).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrates that while DBS under general anaesthesia may lead to lower complication rates overall, awake DBS may lead to less treatment-induced side effects. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in clinical motor outcomes between the two techniques. Thus, DBS under general anaesthesia can be considered at experienced centres in patients who are not candidates for traditional awake DBS or prefer the asleep alternative.

Download Full-text

Comparing two randomized deep brain stimulation trials for Parkinson’s disease

Journal of Neurosurgery ◽

10.3171/2018.12.jns182042 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 132 (5) ◽

pp. 1376-1384 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Günther Deuschl ◽

Kenneth A. Follett ◽

Ping Luo ◽

Joern Rau ◽

Frances M. Weaver ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Life Quality ◽

Veterans Affairs ◽

Best Medical Treatment ◽

Significant Difference ◽

The Us ◽

Deep Brain

OBJECTIVESeveral randomized studies have compared the effect of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus with the best medical treatment in large groups of patients. Important outcome measures differ between studies. Two such major studies, the life-quality study of the German Competence Network for Parkinson’s disease (LQ study) and the US Veterans Affairs/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke trial (VA/NINDS trial), were compared here in order to understand their differences in outcomes.METHODSUnless otherwise noted, analyses were based on those subjects in each study who received a DBS implant (LQ study 76 patients, VA/NINDS trial 140 patients) and who had data for the measurement under consideration (i.e., no imputations for missing data), referred to hereafter as the “as-treated completers” (LQ 69 patients, VA/NINDS 125 patients). Data were prepared and analyzed by biostatisticians at the US Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center, the Coordinating Center for Clinical Trials Marburg, and Medtronic, under the direction of two authors (G.D. and K.A.F.). Data were extracted from the respective databases into SAS data sets and analyzed using SAS software. Analyses were based on the 6-month follow-up data from both studies because this was the endpoint for the LQ study.RESULTSPre-DBS baseline demographics differed significantly between the studies, including greater levodopa responsiveness (LDR) in the LQ study population than in the VA/NINDS group. After DBS, LQ subjects demonstrated greater improvement in motor function (Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale, Motor Examination [UPDRS-III]), activities of daily living (ADLs), and complications of therapy. Medication reduction and improvements in life quality other than ADLs were not significantly different between LQ and VA/NINDS subjects. When the two populations were compared according to pre-DBS LDR, the “full responders” to levodopa (≥ 50% improvement on UPDRS-III with medication) in the two studies showed no significant difference in motor improvement with DBS (LQ 18.5 ± 12.0–point improvement on UPDRS-III vs VA/NINDS 17.7 ± 15.6–point improvement, p = 0.755). Among levodopa full responders, ADLs improved slightly more in the LQ group, but scores on other UPDRS subscales and the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire-39 were not significantly different between the two studies.CONCLUSIONSThis comparison suggests that patient selection criteria, especially preoperative LDR, are the most important source of differences in motor outcomes and quality of life between the two studies.

Download Full-text

Deep brain stimulation outcomes in patients implanted under general anesthesia with frame-based stereotaxy and intraoperative MRI

Journal of Neurosurgery ◽

10.3171/2017.7.jns171166 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 129 (6) ◽

pp. 1572-1578 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Caio M. Matias ◽

Leonardo A. Frizon ◽

Sean J. Nagel ◽

Darlene A. Lobel ◽

André G. Machado

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

General Anesthesia ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Intraoperative Mri ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Preoperative Plan ◽

Updrs Part ◽

Deep Brain

OBJECTIVEThe authors’ aim in this study was to evaluate placement accuracy and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent implantation of deep brain stimulation devices with the aid of frame-based stereotaxy and intraoperative MRI after induction of general anesthesia.METHODSThirty-three patients with movement disorders (27 with Parkinson’s disease) underwent implantation of unilateral or bilateral deep brain stimulation systems (64 leads total). All patients underwent the implantation procedure with standard frame-based techniques under general anesthesia and without microelectrode recording. MR images were acquired immediately after the procedure and fused to the preoperative plan to verify accuracy. To evaluate clinical outcome, different scales were used to assess quality of life (EQ-5D), activities of daily living (Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS] part II), and motor function (UPDRS part III during off- and on-medication and off- and on-stimulation states). Accuracy was assessed by comparing the coordinates (x, y, and z) from the preoperative plan and coordinates from the tip of the lead on intraoperative MRI and postoperative CT scans.RESULTSThe EQ-5D score improved or remained stable in 71% of the patients. When in the off-medication/on-stimulation state, all patients reported significant improvement in UPDRS III score at the last follow-up (p < 0.001), with a reduction of 25.2 points (46.3%) (SD 14.7 points and 23.5%, respectively). There was improvement or stability in the UPDRS II scores for 68% of the Parkinson’s patients. For 2 patients, the stereotactic error was deemed significant based on intraoperative MRI findings. In these patients, the lead was removed and replaced after correcting for the error during the same procedure. Postoperative lead revision was not necessary in any of the patients. Based on findings from the last intraoperative MRI study, the mean difference between the tip of the electrode and the planned target was 0.82 mm (SD 0.5 mm, p = 0.006) for the x-axis, 0.67 mm (SD 0.5 mm, p < 0.001) for the y-axis, and 0.78 mm (SD 0.7 mm, p = 0.008) for the z-axis. On average, the euclidian distance was 1.52 mm (SD 0.6 mm). In patients who underwent bilateral implantation, accuracy was further evaluated comparing the first implanted side and the second implanted side. There was a significant mediolateral (x-axis) difference (p = 0.02) in lead accuracy between the first (mean 1.02 mm, SD 0.57 mm) and the second (mean 0.66 mm, SD 0.50 mm) sides. However, no significant difference was found for the y- and z-axes (p = 0.10 and p = 0.89, respectively).CONCLUSIONSFrame-based DBS implantation under general anesthesia with intraoperative MRI verification of lead location is safe, accurate, precise, and effective compared with standard implantation performed using awake intraoperative physiology. More clinical trials are necessary to directly compare outcomes of each technique.

Download Full-text

Comparison of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on Duration of Starting Tremor after Drug discontinuation in Parkinson's Patients under Deep Brain stimulation

Journal of Molecular Biology Research ◽

10.5539/jmbr.v8n1p1 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Faranak Behnaz ◽

Mahshid Ghasemi ◽

Yalda Shabanpour

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Vital Signs ◽

Drug Discontinuation ◽

Implementation Phase ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Surgeon Satisfaction ◽

Deep Brain

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on the duration of starting tremor after drug discontinuation in patients with Parkinson's disease under deep brain stimulation. In order to reach the research goals, 28 individuals with Parkinson's disease under deep brain stimulation were randomly assigned into two groups including Dexmedetomidine and Propofol that referring to Shahdai Tajrish Hospital in 2016. In the implementation phase. The following drugs were used: Dexmedetomidine (Precedex) with dose of 0.2-0.4 μ/kg/h and Propofol with doses of 20-30 mg bolus, and then 10-20 μ/kg/min infusion, with a control and preservation of BIS between 65 and 85, and also, RAMSY Sedation Score equal to 3. Locus of pin and the head scalp were anaesthetized with lidocaine drug. The total dose of local anaesthetic drugs was recorded at the end of the procedure. The interval time between drug discontinuation and start of tremor, and also, the time of emergence, was recorded as the time between relaxation and when the patient is able to cooperate for a neurological examination. All of the events during the operation and complications and complains of pain and restlessness were recorded. Moreover, the following cases were investigated Post-operative pain, vital signs, and hemodynamic changes, respiratory and alert status of patients for 2 hours in PACU. Patients' pain was measured using VAS (0: painless, 10: maximum pain) at intervals of 30 minutes. Independent t-test and Mann-Whitney test were used for data analysis. Findings showed that there was a significant difference between time to tremor and time to cooperation variables in the two groups. Mean comparison showed that the mean time to tremor and time to cooperation in the Propofol group was higher than the Dexmedetomidine (DEX) group. Other findings showed that there was no significant difference between BIS in the two groups. The results also showed that there was a significant difference between VAS and surgeon satisfaction variables in the two groups. Mean VAS in Propofol group was significantly higher than DEX group. Mean of surgeon satisfaction in the DEX group was significantly higher than Propofol group. In general, it can be said that patients with Parkinson's disease, Dexmedetomidine is superior drug to Propofol to deep brain stimulation.

Download Full-text

Apathy following Bilateral Deep Brain Stimulation of Subthalamic Nucleus in Parkinson’s Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Parkinson s Disease ◽

10.1155/2018/9756468 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 2018 ◽

pp. 1-7 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Ying Wang ◽

Yongsheng Li ◽

Xiaona Zhang ◽

Anmu Xie

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Subthalamic Nucleus ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Stn Dbs ◽

Deep Brain ◽

Stimulation Of

Bilateral deep brain stimulation of subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS) has proven effective in improving motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients. However, psychiatric changes after surgery are controversial. In this study, we specifically analyzed apathy following bilateral STN-DBS in PD patients using a meta-analysis. Relevant articles utilized for this study were obtained through literature search on PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Embase databases. The articles included were those contained both pre- and postsurgery apathy data acquired using the Starkstein Apathy Scale or Apathy Evaluation Scale with patient follow-up of at least three months. A total of 9 out of 86 articles were included in our study through this strict screening process. Standardized mean difference (SMD), that is, Cohen’s d, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated to show the change. We found a significant difference between the presurgery stage and the postsurgery stage scores (SMD = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17∼0.52, P<0.001). STN-DBS seems to relatively worsen the condition of apathy, which may result from both the surgery target (subthalamic nucleus) and the reduction of dopaminergic medication. Further studies should focus on the exact mechanisms of possible postoperative apathy in the future.

Download Full-text

Deep brain stimulation induced normalization of the human functional connectome in Parkinson’s disease

Brain ◽

10.1093/brain/awz239 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 142 (10) ◽

pp. 3129-3143 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Andreas Horn ◽

Gregor Wenzel ◽

Friederike Irmen ◽

Julius Huebl ◽

Ningfei Li ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Network Connectivity ◽

Healthy Controls ◽

Target Structure ◽

Local Effects ◽

Functional Connectome ◽

Deep Brain

Deep brain stimulation has local effects on the target structure, but also global effects via distributed brain networks. Horn et al. show that modulating the activity of the subthalamic nucleus in patients with Parkinson’s disease normalizes signatures of widespread network connectivity towards those found in healthy controls.

Download Full-text

Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson’s Disease Induces Spontaneous Cortical Hypersynchrony In Extended Motor and Cognitive Networks

10.1101/2021.02.23.432542 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Maxwell B Wang ◽

Matthew J Boring ◽

Michael J Ward ◽

R Mark Richardson ◽

Avniel Singh Ghuman

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Cognitive Networks ◽

Spectral Graph Theory ◽

Connectivity Pattern ◽

Significant Difference ◽

High Beta ◽

Deep Brain

AbstractThe mechanism of action of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson’s disease remains unclear. Studies have shown that DBS decreases pathological beta hypersynchrony between the basal ganglia and motor cortex. However, little is known about DBS’s effects on long range corticocortical synchronization. Here, we use machine learning combined with spectral graph theory to compare resting-state cortical connectivity between the off and on-stimulation states and compare these differences to healthy controls. We found that turning DBS on increased high beta and gamma band coherence in a cortical circuit spanning the motor, occipitoparietal, middle temporal, and prefrontal cortices. We found no significant difference between DBS-off and controls in this network with multivariate pattern classification showing that the brain connectivity pattern in control subjects is more like those during DBS-off than DBS-on. These results show that therapeutic DBS increases spontaneous high beta-gamma synchrony in a network that couples motor areas to broader cognitive systems.

Download Full-text

Parkinson’s Disease-Related Risk of Suicide and Effect of Deep Brain Stimulation: Meta-Analysis

Parkinson s Disease ◽

10.1155/2020/8091963 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-10

Author(s):

Juncong Du ◽

Xi Liu ◽

Xuan Zhou ◽

Hui Wang ◽

Wen Zhou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Suicidal Ideation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Deep Brain

Background. Previous studies investigated the risk of suicide in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) but reported discrepant results. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective therapy for PD, while its effect on suicide risk has seldom been researched. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the risk of suicide and/or suicidal ideation in PD patients and in PD patients who underwent DBS. Methods. Relevant articles published in the PubMed or EMBASE or CNKI database from 1990 to December 2019 were sourced, and the combined standardized mortality rate (SMR) or odds ratio (OR) was pooled. Result. A total of 1070 articles were found. After screening, 4 cross-sectional studies, 4 cohort studies, 2 randomized controlled trial studies, and 2 case-control studies were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled data indicated that PD patients may have increased risk of suicide (lnSMR, 0.459; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.286 to 0.632; p<0.001). No significant difference was found in the risk of suicide when comparing PD patients who underwent DBS with PD patients who received only drug therapy (OR = 2.844, 95%CI: 0.619 to 13.072, p=0.179). DBS may increase the risk of suicide and/or suicidal ideation in PD patients compared with general population (lnSMR = 3.383, 95%CI: 2.839 to 3.927, p<0.001). Conclusion. PD patients have higher risk of suicide and/or suicidal ideation compared with controls, while PD patients who received DBS tend to have an increased risk of suicide or suicidal ideation. Psychological evaluation is needed in PD patients, and pre- and post-operation evaluations are necessary for PD patients who underwent DBS.

Download Full-text

Electromagnetic mapping of the effects of deep brain stimulation and dopaminergic medication on movement-related cortical activity and corticomuscular coherence in Parkinson’s disease

10.1101/657882 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Kousik Sarathy Sridharan ◽

Andreas Højlund ◽

Erik Lisbjerg Johnsen ◽

Niels Aagaard Sunde ◽

Sándor Beniczky ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Deep Brain Stimulation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Motor Symptoms ◽

Healthy Controls ◽

Dopaminergic Medication ◽

Corticomuscular Coherence ◽

Gamma Power ◽

Deep Brain

AbstractBackgroundParkinson’s disease (PD) is a debilitating neurodegenerative disorder. PD can be treated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) when dopaminergic medication is no longer a viable option. Both treatments are effective in improving motor symptoms, however, their underlying mechanisms are not fully elucidated yet.ObjectivesTo study the effects of DBS and dopaminergic medication treatments on cortical processing and corticomuscular drive during movements.MethodsMagnetoencephalography (MEG) was recorded in 10 PD patients and 10 healthy controls, performing phasic hand contractions (hand gripping). Measurements were performed in DBS-treated, untreated and dopaminergic-medicated states; healthy controls received no treatment interventions. Participants performed phasic contractions with their right hand, recorded with electromyography (EMG). Our measures of interest were beta (13-30 Hz) corticomuscular coherence (CMC) and low-gamma (31-45 Hz) power. We used Bayesian statistics on summary values from sensor space data, and we localized the sources of the effects of treatments on beta-CMC and low-gamma power using beamforming.ResultsIn PD patients, DBS led to reduced CMC values, whereas dopaminergic medication increased beta-CMC values (localized to contralateral M1) to even higher levels than the controls. DBS, on the other hand, increased low-gamma power (localized to M1) compared to controls and to other conditions. Yet both treatments had similar beneficial effects on the patients’ motor symptoms evaluated by UPDRS-III.ConclusionDespite comparable improvements from both treatments on motor symptoms, DBS and dopaminergic medication seem to have different effects on motor cortical function. This indicates that the treatments undertake different functional strategies to improve PD symptoms.

Download Full-text