Article

Subthalamic deep brain stimulation with a constant-current device in Parkinson's disease: an open-label randomised controlled trial.

Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL 32607, USA. .edu
The Lancet Neurology (Impact Factor: 21.82). 02/2012; 11(2):140-9. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70308-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The effects of constant-current deep brain stimulation (DBS) have not been studied in controlled trials in patients with Parkinson's disease. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of bilateral constant-current DBS of the subthalamic nucleus.
This prospective, randomised, multicentre controlled trial was done between Sept 26, 2005, and Aug 13, 2010, at 15 clinical sites specialising in movement disorders in the USA. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18-80 years, had Parkinson's disease for 5 years or more, and had either 6 h or more daily off time reported in a patient diary of moderate to severe dyskinesia during waking hours. The patients received bilateral implantation in the subthalamic nucleus of a constant-current DBS device. After implantation, computer-generated randomisation was done with a block size of four, and patients were randomly assigned to the stimulation or control group (stimulation:control ratio 3:1). The control group received implantation without activation for 3 months. No blinding occurred during this study, and both patients and investigators were aware of the treatment group. The primary outcome variable was the change in on time without bothersome dyskinesia (ie, good quality on time) at 3 months as recorded in patients' diaries. Patients were followed up for 1 year. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00552474.
Of 168 patients assessed for eligibility, 136 had implantation of the constant-current device and were randomly assigned to receive immediate (101 patients) or delayed (35 patients) stimulation. Both study groups reported a mean increase of good quality on time after 3 months, and the increase was greater in the stimulation group (4·27 h vs 1·77 h, difference 2·51 [95% CI 0·87-4·16]; p=0·003). Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale motor scores in the off-medication, on-stimulation condition improved by 39% from baseline (24·8 vs 40·8). Some serious adverse events occurred after DBS implantation, including infections in five (4%) of 136 patients and intracranial haemorrhage in four (3%) patients. Stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus was associated with dysarthria, fatigue, paraesthesias, and oedema, whereas gait problems, disequilibrium, dyskinesia, and falls were reported in both groups.
Constant-current DBS of the subthalamic nucleus produced significant improvements in good quality on time when compared with a control group without stimulation. Future trials should compare the effects of constant-current DBS with those of voltage-controlled stimulation.
St Jude Medical Neuromodulation Division.

0 Followers
 · 
273 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an established therapy for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). Motor efficacy and safety have been established for constant voltage (CV) devices and more recently for constant current (CC) devices. CC devices adjust output voltage to provide CC stimulation irrespective of impedance fluctuation, while the current applied by CV stimulation depends on the impedance that may change over time. No study has directly compared the clinical effects of these two stimulation modalities. Objective: To compare the safety and clinical impact of CC STN DBS to CV STN DBS in patients with advanced PD 2 years after surgery. Methods: Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had undergone STN DBS surgery for idiopathic PD, had been implanted with a Medtronic Activa PC and if their stimulation program and medication had been stable for at least 1 year. This single-center trial was designed as a double-blind, randomized, prospective study with crossover after 2 weeks. Motor equivalence of the 2 modalities was confirmed utilizing part III of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). PD diaries and multiple subjective and objective evaluations of quality of life, depression, cognition and emotional processing were evaluated on both CV and on CC stimulation. Analysis using the paired t test with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons was performed to identify any significant difference between the stimulation modalities. Results: 8 patients were recruited (6 men, 2 women); 1 patient did not complete the study. The average age at surgery was 56.7 years (range 47-63). Disease duration at the time of surgery was 7.5 years (range 3-12). Patients were recruited 23.8 months (range 22.5-24) after surgery. At the postoperative study baseline, this patient group showed an average motor improvement of 69% (range 51-97) as measured by the change in UPDRS part III with stimulation alone. Levodopa equivalent medication was reduced on average by 67% (range 15-88). Patients were poorly compliant with PD diaries, and these did not yield useful information. The minor deterioration in quality-of-life scores (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39, Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire) with CC stimulation were not statistically significant. Two measures of depression (Hamilton Rating Scale D17, Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self-Report) showed a nonsignificant lower score (less depression) with CC stimulation, but a third (Beck Depression Inventory) showed equivalence. Cognitive testing (Mini Mental State Examination) and emotional processing (Montreal Affective Voices) were equivalent for CC and CV. Conclusion: CC STN DBS is safe. For equivalent motor efficacy, no significant difference could be identified between CC and CV stimulation for nonmotor evaluations in PD patients 2 years after surgery. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.
    Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 02/2015; 93(2):114-121. DOI:10.1159/000368443 · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This review presents state-of-the-art knowledge about the roles of the basal ganglia (BG) in action-selection, cognition, and motivation, and how this knowledge has been used to improve deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders. Such pathological conditions include Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, Tourette syndrome, depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. The first section presents evidence supporting current hypotheses of how the cortico-BG circuitry works to select motor and emotional actions, and how defects in this circuitry can cause symptoms of the BG diseases. Emphasis is given to the role of striatal dopamine on motor performance, motivated behaviors and learning of procedural memories. Next, the use of cutting-edge electrochemical techniques in animal and human studies of BG functioning under normal and disease conditions is discussed. Finally, functional neuroimaging studies are reviewed; these works have shown the relationship between cortico-BG structures activated during DBS and improvement of disease symptoms. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 02/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.02.003 · 10.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An intraoperative electrode (microelectrode) is used in the deep brain stimulation (DBS) technique to pinpoint the brain target and to choose the best parameters for the electrical stimulus. However, when the intraoperative electrode is replaced with the chronic one (macroelectrode), the observed effects do not always coincide with predictions. To investigate the causes of such discrepancies, a 3D model of the basal ganglia has been considered and realistic models of both intraoperative and chronic electrodes have been developed and numerically solved. Results of simulations of the electric potential (V) and the activating function (AF) along neuronal fibers show that the different geometries and sizes of the two electrodes do not change the distributions and polarities of these functions, but rather the amplitudes. This effect is similar to the one produced by the presence of different tissue layers (edema or glial tissue) in the peri-electrode space. Conversely, an inaccurate positioning of the chronic electrode with respect to the intraoperative one (electric centers not coincident) may induce a completely different electric stimulation in some groups of fibers.
    Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience 02/2015; 9:2. DOI:10.3389/fncom.2015.00002 · 2.23 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
152 Downloads
Available from
May 31, 2014