scholarly journals DIPS (Dystonia Image-based Programming of Stimulation: a prospective, randomized, double-blind crossover trial)

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Lange ◽  
Jonas Roothans ◽  
Tim Wichmann ◽  
Götz Gelbrich ◽  
Christoph Röser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
In Silico ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Stimulation Parameters ◽  
Deep Brain

Abstract Introduction Deep brain stimulation of the internal globus pallidus is an effective treatment for dystonia. However, there is a large variability in clinical outcome with up to 25% non-responders even in highly selected primary dystonia patients. In a large cohort of patients we recently demonstrated that the variable clinical outcomes of pallidal DBS for dystonia may result to a large degree by the exact location and stimulation volume within the pallidal region. Here we test a novel approach of programing based on these insights: we first defined probabilistic maps of anti-dystonic effects by aggregating individual electrode locations and volumes of tissue activated of > 80 patients collected in a multicentre effort. We subsequently modified the algorithms to be able to test all possible stimulation settings of de novo patients in silico based on the expected clinical outcome and thus potentially predict the best possible stimulation parameters for the individual patients. Methods Within the framework of a BMBF-funded study, this concept of a computer-based prediction of optimal stimulation parameters for patients with dystonia will be tested in a randomized, controlled crossover study. The main parameter for clinical efficacy and primary endpoint is based on the blinded physician rating of dystonia severity reflected by Clinical Dystonia Rating Scales for both interventions (best clinical settings and model predicted settings) after 4 weeks of continuous stimulation. The primary endpoint is defined as “successful treatment with model predicted settings” (yes or no). The value is “yes” if the motor symptoms with model predicted settings are equal or better (tolerance 5% of absolute difference in percentages) to clinical settings. Secondary endpoints will include measures of quality of life, calculated energy consumption of the neurostimulation system and physician time for programming. Perspective We envision, that computer-guided deep brain stimulation programming in silico might provide optimal stimulation settings for patients with dystonia without the burden of months of programming sessions. The study protocol is designed to evaluate which programming method is more effective in controlling motor symptom severity and improving quality of life in dystonia (best clinical settings and model predicted settings). Trial registration Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on Oct 27, 2021 (NCT05097001).

Advanced Treatment for Dystonia

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robertus M. A. de Bie ◽  
Susanne E. M. Ten Holter
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Basal Ganglia ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Advanced Treatment ◽  
Stimulation Parameters ◽  
Acceptable Quality ◽  
Underlying Pathogenesis ◽  
Deep Brain

Deep-brain stimulation is a last resort for the management of dystonia or dystonic movement disorders when oral or injectable therapies do not provide adequate relief to allow an acceptable quality of life. The underlying pathogenesis of dystonia is less well understood than in Parkinson’s disease, in which deep-brain stimulation is generally expected to provide effective and long-lasting benefit. Furthermore, it is likely that dystonia represents a number of different basal ganglia pathologies. The response of dystonia to deep-brain stimulation is typically delayed for up to weeks or months following a change in stimulation parameters. All of these factors make it more difficult to predict outcomes in dystonia following deep-brain stimulation, thus making patient selection all the more important.

Deep Brain Stimulation Improves Medication Related Addictive Behavior and Associated Quality of Life

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hunter Covert ◽  
Pennie S. Seibert ◽  
Caitlin C. Otto ◽  
Missy Coblentz ◽  
Nicole Whitener ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Addictive Behavior ◽  
Deep Brain

Clinical outcomes of asleep vs awake deep brain stimulation for Parkinson disease

Neurology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 89 (19) ◽  
pp. 1944-1950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew A. Brodsky ◽  
Shannon Anderson ◽  
Charles Murchison ◽  
Mara Seier ◽  
Jennifer Wilhelm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Parkinson Disease ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Electrode Placement ◽  
Microelectrode Recording ◽  
Imaging Guidance ◽  
Motor Outcomes ◽  
Deep Brain

Objective:To compare motor and nonmotor outcomes at 6 months of asleep deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson disease (PD) using intraoperative imaging guidance to confirm electrode placement vs awake DBS using microelectrode recording to confirm electrode placement.Methods:DBS candidates with PD referred to Oregon Health & Science University underwent asleep DBS with imaging guidance. Six-month outcomes were compared to those of patients who previously underwent awake DBS by the same surgeon and center. Assessments included an “off”-levodopa Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) II and III, the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, motor diaries, and speech fluency.Results:Thirty participants underwent asleep DBS and 39 underwent awake DBS. No difference was observed in improvement of UPDRS III (+14.8 ± 8.9 vs +17.6 ± 12.3 points, p = 0.19) or UPDRS II (+9.3 ± 2.7 vs +7.4 ± 5.8 points, p = 0.16). Improvement in “on” time without dyskinesia was superior in asleep DBS (+6.4 ± 3.0 h/d vs +1.7 ± 1.2 h/d, p = 0.002). Quality of life scores improved in both groups (+18.8 ± 9.4 in awake, +8.9 ± 11.5 in asleep). Improvement in summary index (p = 0.004) and subscores for cognition (p = 0.011) and communication (p < 0.001) were superior in asleep DBS. Speech outcomes were superior in asleep DBS, both in category (+2.77 ± 4.3 points vs −6.31 ± 9.7 points (p = 0.0012) and phonemic fluency (+1.0 ± 8.2 points vs −5.5 ± 9.6 points, p = 0.038).Conclusions:Asleep DBS for PD improved motor outcomes over 6 months on par with or better than awake DBS, was superior with regard to speech fluency and quality of life, and should be an option considered for all patients who are candidates for this treatment.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier:NCT01703598.Classification of evidence:This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with PD undergoing DBS, asleep intraoperative CT imaging–guided implantation is not significantly different from awake microelectrode recording–guided implantation in improving motor outcomes at 6 months.

Sustained quality-of-life improvements over 10 years after deep brain stimulation for dystonia

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 1160-1167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elliot Hogg ◽  
Emmanuel During ◽  
Echo E. Tan ◽  
Kishore Athreya ◽  
Jonathan Eskenazi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Deep Brain

scholarly journals Quality of life predicts outcome of deep brain stimulation in early Parkinson disease

Neurology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 92 (10) ◽  
pp. e1109-e1120 ◽  
Author(s):  
W.M. Michael Schuepbach ◽  
Lisa Tonder ◽  
Alfons Schnitzler ◽  
Paul Krack ◽  
Joern Rau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Parkinson Disease ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Motor Complications ◽  
Baseline Characteristics ◽  
Stn Dbs ◽  
Disease Specific ◽  
Deep Brain

ObjectiveTo investigate predictors for improvement of disease-specific quality of life (QOL) after deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) for Parkinson disease (PD) with early motor complications.MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of data from the previously published EARLYSTIM study, a prospective randomized trial comparing STN-DBS (n = 124) to best medical treatment (n = 127) after 2 years follow-up with disease-specific QOL (39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire summary index [PDQ-39-SI]) as the primary endpoint. Linear regression analyses of the baseline characteristics age, disease duration, duration of motor complications, and disease severity measured at baseline with the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (UPDRS-III “off” and “on” medications, UPDRS-IV) were conducted to determine predictors of change in PDQ-39-SI.ResultsPDQ-39-SI at baseline was correlated to the change in PDQ-39-SI after 24 months in both treatment groups (p < 0.05). The higher the baseline score (worse QOL) the larger the improvement in QOL after 24 months. No correlation was found for any of the other baseline characteristics analyzed in either treatment group.ConclusionImpaired QOL as subjectively evaluated by the patient is the most important predictor of benefit in patients with PD and early motor complications, fulfilling objective gold standard inclusion criteria for STN-DBS. Our results prompt systematically including evaluation of disease-specific QOL when selecting patients with PD for STN-DBS.Clinicaltrials.gov identifierNCT00354133.

Clinical outcomes following awake and asleep deep brain stimulation for Parkinson disease

2018 ◽  
Vol 130 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsinsue Chen ◽  
Zaman Mirzadeh ◽  
Kristina M. Chapple ◽  
Margaret Lambert ◽  
Holly A. Shill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Parkinson Disease ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Stn Dbs ◽  
Deep Brain

OBJECTIVERecent studies have shown similar clinical outcomes between Parkinson disease (PD) patients treated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) under general anesthesia without microelectrode recording (MER), so-called “asleep” DBS, and historical cohorts undergoing “awake” DBS with MER guidance. However, few studies include internal controls. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes after globus pallidus internus (GPi) and subthalamic nucleus (STN) DBS using awake and asleep techniques at a single institution.METHODSPD patients undergoing awake or asleep bilateral GPi or STN DBS were prospectively monitored. The primary outcome measure was stimulation-induced change in motor function off medication 6 months postoperatively, measured using the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale part III (UPDRS-III). Secondary outcomes included change in quality of life, measured by the 39-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), change in levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD), stereotactic accuracy, stimulation parameters, and adverse events.RESULTSSix-month outcome data were available for 133 patients treated over 45 months (78 GPi [16 awake, 62 asleep] and 55 STN [14 awake, 41 asleep]). UPDRS-III score improvement with stimulation did not differ between awake and asleep groups for GPi (awake, 20.8 points [38.5%]; asleep, 18.8 points [37.5%]; p = 0.45) or STN (awake, 21.6 points [40.3%]; asleep, 26.1 points [48.8%]; p = 0.20) targets. The percentage improvement in PDQ-39 and LEDD was similar for awake and asleep groups for both GPi (p = 0.80 and p = 0.54, respectively) and STN cohorts (p = 0.85 and p = 0.49, respectively).CONCLUSIONSIn PD patients, bilateral GPi and STN DBS using the asleep method resulted in motor, quality-of-life, and medication reduction outcomes that were comparable to those of the awake method.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document