scholarly journals Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in a patient with deep brain stimulation electrodes

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 174-178
Author(s):  
Aline Iannone ◽  
Nasser Allam ◽  
Joaquim P. Brasil-Neto
Keyword(s):  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Movement Disorders ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Cerebellar Tdcs ◽  
Stn Dbs ◽  
Deep Brain ◽  
Cerebellar Stimulation

ABSTRACT Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated in movement disorders, making it a therapeutic alternative in clinical settings. However, there is still no consensus on the most appropriate treatment protocols in most cases, and the presence of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes has been regarded as a contraindication to the procedure. We recently studied the effects of cerebellar tDCS on a female patient already undergoing subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) for generalized dystonia. She also presented with chronic pain and depression. With STN-DBS, there was improvement of dystonia, and botulinum toxin significantly reduced pain. However, depressive symptoms were worse after STN-DBS surgery. Methods: Neuromodulation with 2 mA anodal cerebellar tDCS was initiated, targeting both hemispheres in each daily 30 minute session: 15 minutes of left cerebellar stimulation followed by 15 minutes of right cerebellar stimulation. The DBS electrodes were in place and functional, but the current was turned off during tDCS. Results: Although our goal was to improve dystonic movements, after 10 tDCS sessions there was also improvement in mood with normalization of Beck Depression Inventory scores. There were no complications in spite of the implanted STN-DBS leads. Conclusion: Our results indicate that tDCS is safe in patients with DBS electrodes and may be an effective add-on neuromodulatory tool in the treatment of potential DBS partial efficacy in patients with movement disorders.

The Effect of Deep Brain Stimulation for Movement Disorders on Emotions

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Richards ◽  
Paul M. Wilson ◽  
Pennie S. Seibert ◽  
Carin M. Patterson ◽  
Caitlin C. Otto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Movement Disorders ◽  
Deep Brain

Reoperation for device infection and erosion following deep brain stimulation implantable pulse generator placement

2020 ◽  
Vol 133 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis J. Atchley ◽  
Nicholas M. B. Laskay ◽  
Brandon A. Sherrod ◽  
A. K. M. Fazlur Rahman ◽  
Harrison C. Walker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Movement Disorders ◽  
Pulse Generator ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Implantable Pulse Generator ◽  
Device Infection ◽  
Deep Brain

OBJECTIVEInfection and erosion following implantable pulse generator (IPG) placement are associated with morbidity and cost for patients with deep brain stimulation (DBS) systems. Here, the authors provide a detailed characterization of infection and erosion events in a large cohort that underwent DBS surgery for movement disorders.METHODSThe authors retrospectively reviewed consecutive IPG placements and replacements in patients who had undergone DBS surgery for movement disorders at the University of Alabama at Birmingham between 2013 and 2016. IPG procedures occurring before 2013 in these patients were also captured. Descriptive statistics, survival analyses, and logistic regression were performed using generalized linear mixed effects models to examine risk factors for the primary outcomes of interest: infection within 1 year or erosion within 2 years of IPG placement.RESULTSIn the study period, 384 patients underwent a total of 995 IPG procedures (46.4% were initial placements) and had a median follow-up of 2.9 years. Reoperation for infection occurred after 27 procedures (2.7%) in 21 patients (5.5%). No difference in the infection rate was observed for initial placement versus replacement (p = 0.838). Reoperation for erosion occurred after 16 procedures (1.6%) in 15 patients (3.9%). Median time to reoperation for infection and erosion was 51 days (IQR 24–129 days) and 149 days (IQR 112–285 days), respectively. Four patients with infection (19.0%) developed a second infection requiring a same-side reoperation, two of whom developed a third infection. Intraoperative vancomycin powder was used in 158 cases (15.9%) and did not decrease the infection risk (infected: 3.2% with vancomycin vs 2.6% without, p = 0.922, log-rank test). On logistic regression, a previous infection increased the risk for infection (OR 35.0, 95% CI 7.9–156.2, p < 0.0001) and a lower patient BMI was a risk factor for erosion (BMI ≤ 24 kg/m2: OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.1–8.6, p = 0.03).CONCLUSIONSIPG-related infection and erosion following DBS surgery are uncommon but clinically significant events. Their respective timelines and risk factors suggest different etiologies and thus different potential corrective procedures.

scholarly journals Fully Automated Targeting Using Nonrigid Image Registration Matches Accuracy and Exceeds Precision of Best Manual Approaches to Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation Targeting in Parkinson Disease

Neurosurgery ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 76 (6) ◽  
pp. 756-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srivatsan Pallavaram ◽  
Pierre-François D'Haese ◽  
Wendell Lake ◽  
Peter E. Konrad ◽  
Benoit M. Dawant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Image Registration ◽  
Parkinson Disease ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Red Nucleus ◽  
Nonrigid Image Registration ◽  
Direct Targeting ◽  
Fully Automatic ◽  
Stn Dbs ◽  
Deep Brain

Abstract BACKGROUND: Finding the optimal location for the implantation of the electrode in deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery is crucial for maximizing the therapeutic benefit to the patient. Such targeting is challenging for several reasons, including anatomic variability between patients as well as the lack of consensus about the location of the optimal target. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of popular manual targeting methods against a fully automatic nonrigid image registration-based approach. METHODS: In 71 Parkinson disease subthalamic nucleus (STN)-DBS implantations, an experienced functional neurosurgeon selected the target manually using 3 different approaches: indirect targeting using standard stereotactic coordinates, direct targeting based on the patient magnetic resonance imaging, and indirect targeting relative to the red nucleus. Targets were also automatically predicted by using a leave-one-out approach to populate the CranialVault atlas with the use of nonrigid image registration. The different targeting methods were compared against the location of the final active contact, determined through iterative clinical programming in each individual patient. RESULTS: Targeting by using standard stereotactic coordinates corresponding to the center of the motor territory of the STN had the largest targeting error (3.69 mm), followed by direct targeting (3.44 mm), average stereotactic coordinates of active contacts from this study (3.02 mm), red nucleus-based targeting (2.75 mm), and nonrigid image registration-based automatic predictions using the CranialVault atlas (2.70 mm). The CranialVault atlas method had statistically smaller variance than all manual approaches. CONCLUSION: Fully automatic targeting based on nonrigid image registration with the use of the CranialVault atlas is as accurate and more precise than popular manual methods for STN-DBS.

Basal ganglia local field potentials: applications in the development of new deep brain stimulation devices for movement disorders

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 605-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Marceglia ◽  
Lorenzo Rossi ◽  
Guglielmo Foffani ◽  
AnnaMaria Bianchi ◽  
Sergio Cerutti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Basal Ganglia ◽  
Local Field ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Movement Disorders ◽  
Local Field Potentials ◽  
Field Potentials ◽  
Deep Brain

Deep Brain Stimulation for Non-Movement Disorders

2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (19) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Zacest ◽  
Kim J. Burchiel
Keyword(s):  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Movement Disorders ◽  
Deep Brain
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document