Awake Testing during Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery Predicts Postoperative Stimulation Side Effect Thresholds

Intraoperative physiology augments atlas-based data in awake deep brain stimulation

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is commonly performed with patients awake to perform intraoperative microelectrode recordings and/or macrostimulation testing to guide final electrode placement. Supplemental information from atlas-based databases derived from prior patient data and visualised as efficacy heat maps transformed and overlaid onto preoperative MRIs can be used to guide preoperative target planning and intraoperative final positioning. Our quantitative analysis of intraoperative testing and corresponding changes made to final electrode positioning aims to highlight the value of intraoperative neurophysiological testing paired with image-based data to optimise final electrode positioning in a large patient cohort.

METHODS

Data from 451 patients with movement disorders treated with 822 individual DBS leads at a single institution from 2011 to 2021 were included. Atlas-based data was used to guide surgical targeting. Intraoperative testing data and coordinate data were retrospectively obtained from a large patient database. Medical records were reviewed to obtain active contact usage and neurologist-defined outcomes at 1 year.

RESULTS

Microelectrode recording firing profiles differ per track, per target and inform the locations where macrostimulation testing is performed. Macrostimulation performance correlates with the final electrode track chosen. Centroids of atlas-based efficacy heat maps per target were close in proximity to and may predict active contact usage at 1 year. Overall, patient outcomes at 1 year were improved for patients with better macrostimulation response.

CONCLUSIONS

Atlas-based imaging data is beneficial for target planning and intraoperative guidance, and in conjunction with intraoperative neurophysiological testing during awake DBS can be used to individualize and optimise final electrode positioning, resulting in favourable outcomes.

The Effects of Different Anesthesia Methods on the Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease by Bilateral Deep Brain Stimulation of the Subthalamic Nucleus

Background

Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN–DBS) surgery for Parkinson’s disease (PD) is routinely performed at medical centers worldwide. However, it is debated whether general anesthesia (GA) or traditional local anesthetic (LA) is superior.

Purpose

This study aims to compare the effects of LA and GA operation methods on clinical improvement in patients with PD, such as motor and non-motor symptoms, after STN–DBS surgery at our center.

Method

A total of 157 patients with PD were retrospectively identified as having undergone surgery under LA (n = 81) or GA (n = 76) states. In this study, the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale Motor Score (UPDRS-III) in three states, levodopa-equivalent-daily-dose (LEDD), surgical duration, intraoperative microelectrode recording (iMER) signal length, postoperative intracranial volume, electrode implantation error, neuropsychological function, quality of life scores, and complication rates were collected and compared. All patients with PD were routinely followed up at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months postoperatively.

Result

Overall improvement in UPDRS-III was demonstrated at postoperative follow-up, and there was no significant difference between the two groups in medication-off, stimulation-off state and medication-off, stimulation-on state. However, UPDRS-III scores in medication-on, stimulation-on state under GA was significantly lower than that in the LA group. During postoperative follow-up, LEDD in the LA group (6, 12, 18, and 24 months, postoperatively) was significantly lower than in the GA group. However, there were no significant differences at baseline or 1-month between the two groups. The GA group had a shorter surgical duration, lower intracranial volume, and longer iMER signal length than the LA group. However, there was no significant group difference in electrode implantation accuracy and complication rates. Additionally, the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) was significantly lower in the GA group than the LA group at 1-month follow-up, but this difference disappeared at longer follow-up. Besides, there was no significant group difference in the 39-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) scale scores.

Conclusion

Although both groups showed overall motor function improvement without a significant postoperative difference, the GA group seemed superior in surgical duration, intracranial volume, and iMER signal length. As the accuracy of electrode implantation can be ensured by iMER monitoring, DBS with GA will become more widely accepted.

Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation driven by primary motor cortex γ2 activity in parkinsonian monkeys

In parkinsonism, subthalamic nucleus (STN) electrical deep brain stimulation (DBS) improves symptoms, but may be associated with side effects. Adaptive DBS (aDBS), which enables modulation of stimulation, may limit side effects, but limited information is available about clinical effectiveness and efficaciousness. We developed a brain-machine interface for aDBS, which enables modulation of stimulation parameters of STN-DBS in response to γ2 band activity (80-200 Hz) of local field potentials (LFPs) recorded from the primary motor cortex (M1), and tested its effectiveness in parkinsonian monkeys. We trained two monkeys to perform an upper limb reaching task and rendered them parkinsonian with 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine. Bipolar intracortical recording electrodes were implanted in the M1, and a recording chamber was attached to access the STN. In aDBS, the M1 LFPs were recorded, filtered into the γ2 band, and discretized into logic pulses by a window discriminator, and the pulses were used to modulate the interval and amplitude of DBS pulses. In constant DBS (cDBS), constant stimulus intervals and amplitudes were used. Reaction and movement times during the task were measured and compared between aDBS and cDBS. The M1-γ2 activities were increased before and during movements in parkinsonian monkeys and these activities modulated the aDBS pulse interval, amplitude, and dispersion. With aDBS and cDBS, reaction and movement times were significantly decreased in comparison to DBS-OFF. The electric charge delivered was lower with aDBS than cDBS. M1-γ2 aDBS in parkinsonian monkeys resulted in clinical benefits that did not exceed those from cDBS. However, M1-γ2 aDBS achieved this magnitude of benefit for only two thirds of the charge delivered by cDBS. In conclusion, M1-γ2 aDBS is an effective therapeutic approach which requires a lower electrical charge delivery than cDBS for comparable clinical benefits.

Impact of Procedural Sedation on the Clinical Outcome of Microelectrode Recording Guided Deep Brain Stimulation in Patients with Parkinson's Disease

BACKGROUND

Subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) has become a routine treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). DBS surgery is commonly performed under local anesthesia (LA) to obtain reliable microelectrode recordings. However, procedural sedation and/or analgesia (PSA) is often desirable to improve patient comfort. The impact of PSA in addition to LA on outcome is largely unknown. Therefore, we performed an observational study to assess the effect of PSA compared to LA alone during STN DBS surgery on outcome in PD patients.

METHODS

Seventy PD patients (22 under LA, 48 under LA + PSA) scheduled for STN DBS implantation were included. Dexmedetomidine, clonidine or remifentanil were used for PSA. The primary outcome was the change in Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Score III (MDS-UPDRS III) and levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD) between baseline, one month before surgery, and twelve months postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures were motor function during activities of daily living (MDS-UPDRS II), cognitive alterations and surgical adverse events. Postoperative assessment was conducted in "on" stimulation and "on" medication conditions.

RESULTS

At twelve months follow-up, UPDRS III and UPDRS II scores in "on" medication conditions were similar between the LA and PSA groups. The two groups showed a similar LEDD reduction and an equivalent decline in executive function measured by the Stroop Color-Word Test, Trail Making Test-B, and verbal fluency. The incidence of perioperative and postoperative adverse events was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that PSA during STN DBS implantation surgery in PD patients was not associated with differences in motor and non-motor outcome after twelve months compared with LA only.

Asleep Deep Brain Stimulation in Patients With Isolated Dystonia: Stereotactic Accuracy, Efficacy, and Safety

OBJECTIVES

Lead placement for deep brain stimulation (DBS) is routinely performed using neuroimaging or microelectrode recording (MER). Recent studies have demonstrated that DBS under general anesthesia using an imaging-guided target technique ("asleep" DBS) can be performed accurately and effectively with lower surgery complication rates than the MER-guided target method under local anesthesia ("awake" DBS). This suggests that asleep DBS may be a more acceptable method. However, there is limited direct evidence focused on isolated dystonia using this method. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes and targeting accuracy in patients with dystonia who underwent asleep DBS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined 56 patients (112 leads) with isolated dystonia who underwent asleep DBS targeting in the globus pallidus internus (GPi) and subthalamic nucleus (STN). The Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (BFMDRS) scores were assessed preoperatively and at 12-month follow-up (12 m-FU). The lead accuracy was evaluated by comparing the coordinates of the preoperative plan with those of the final electrode implantation location. Other measures analyzed included stimulation parameters and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

For both GPi and STN cohorts, mean BFMDRS motor scores were significantly lower at 12 m-FU (8.9 ± 10.9 and 4.6 ± 5.7 points) than at baseline (22.6 ± 16.4 and 16.1 ± 14.1 points, p < 0.001). The mean difference between the planned target and the distal contact of the leads was 1.33 ± 0.54 mm for the right brain electrodes and 1.50 ± 0.57 mm for the left, determined by Euclidian distance. No perioperative complications or AEs related to the device were observed during the complete follow-up. However, AEs associated with stimulation occurred in 12 and 6 patients in the GPi and STN groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Asleep DBS may be an accurate, effective, and safe method for treating patients with isolated dystonia regardless of the stimulation target.

Outcomes and Adverse Effects of Deep Brain Stimulation on the Ventral Intermediate Nucleus in Patients with Essential Tremor

Objective

This study was aimed at identifying the potential outcome predictors, comparing the efficacy in patients with different tremor characteristics, and summarizing the adverse effect rates (AERs) of deep brain stimulation on the ventral intermediate nucleus (VIM-DBS) for essential tremor (ET).

Methods

An extensive search of articles published to date in 2019 was conducted, and two main aspects were analyzed. Improvement was calculated as a percentage of change in any objective tremor rating scale (TRS) and analyzed by subgroup analyses of patients' tremor characteristics, laterality, and stimulation parameters. Furthermore, the AERs were analyzed as follows: the adverse effects (AEs) were classified as stimulation-related, surgical-related, or device-related effects. A simple regression analysis was used to identify the potential prognostic factors, and a two-sample mean-comparison test was used to verify the statistical significance of the subgroup analyses.

Results

Forty-six articles involving 1714 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled improvement in any objective TRS score was 61.3% (95% CI: 0.564-0.660) at the mean follow-up visit (20.0 ± 17.3 months). The midline and extremity symptoms showed consistent improvement (P = 0.440), and the results of the comparison of postural and kinetic tremor were the same (P = 0.219). In addition, the improvement in rest tremor was similar to that in action tremor (OR = 2.759, P = 0.120). In the simple regression analysis, the preoperative Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (FTM-TRS) scores and follow-up time were negatively correlated with the percentage change in any objective TRS score (P < 0.05). The most common adverse event was dysarthria (10.5%), which is a stimulation-related AE (23.6%), while the rates of the surgical-related and device-related AEs were 6.4% and 11.5%, respectively.

Conclusion

VIM-DBS is an efficient and safe surgical method in ET, and the efficacy was not affected by the body distribution of tremor, age at surgery, and disease duration. Lower preoperative FTM-TRS scores likely indicate greater improvement, and the effect of VIM-DBS declines over time.

Asleep Surgery May Improve the Therapeutic Window for Deep Brain Stimulation of the Subthalamic Nucleus

OBJECTIVE

The effect of anesthesia type in terms of asleep vs. awake deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery on therapeutic window (TW) has not been investigated so far. The objective of the study was to investigate whether asleep DBS surgery of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) improves TW for both directional (dDBS) and omnidirectional (oDBS) stimulation in a large single-center population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 104 consecutive patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) undergoing STN-DBS surgery (80 asleep and 24 awake) were compared regarding TW, therapeutic threshold, side effect threshold, improvement of Unified PD Rating Scale motor score (UPDRS-III) and degree of levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) reduction.

RESULTS

Asleep DBS surgery led to significantly wider TW compared to awake surgery for both dDBS and oDBS. However, dDBS further increased TW compared to oDBS in the asleep group only and not in the awake group. Clinical efficacy in terms of UPDRS-III improvement and LEDD reduction did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides first evidence for improvement of therapeutic window by asleep surgery compared to awake surgery, which can be strengthened further by dDBS. These results support the notion of preferring asleep over awake surgery but needs to be confirmed by prospective trials.

Latency of subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation-evoked cortical activity as a potential biomarker for postoperative motor side effects

OBJECTIVE

Here, we investigate whether cortical activation predicts motor side effects of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and whether these potential biomarkers have utility under general anesthesia.

METHODS

We recorded scalp potentials elicited by DBS during surgery (n = 11), both awake and under general anesthesia, and in an independent ambulatory cohort (n = 8). Across a range of stimulus configurations, we measured the amplitude and timing of short- and long-latency response components and linked them to motor side effects.

RESULTS

Regardless of anesthesia state, in both cohorts, DBS settings with capsular side effects elicited early responses with peak latencies clustering at <1 ms. This early response was preserved under anesthesia in all participants (11/11). In contrast, the long-latency components were suppressed completely in 6/11 participants. Finally, the latency of the earliest response could predict the presence of postoperative motor side effects both awake and under general anesthesia (84.8% and 75.8% accuracy, awake and under anesthesia, respectively).

CONCLUSION

DBS elicits short-latency cortical activation, both awake and under general anesthesia, which appears to reveal interactions between the stimulus and the corticospinal tract.

SIGNIFICANCE

Short-latency evoked cortical activity can potentially be used to aid both DBS lead placement and post-operative programming.

Reliability of Intraoperative Testing During Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for medically refractory Parkinson's disease (PD). During DBS surgery, intraoperative testing is performed to confirm optimal lead placement by determining the stimulation thresholds for symptom improvement and side effects. However, the reliability of intraoperative testing in predicting distant postoperative thresholds is unknown. In this study, we hypothesized that intraoperative testing reliably estimates postoperative thresholds for both symptom improvement and side effects.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a prospective database with intraoperative and postoperative thresholds for symptom improvement and side effects from a cohort of 66 PD patients who underwent STN DBS. We recorded the stimulation locations relative to the mid-commissural point. Within-patient stimulation pairs were generated by clustering the intraoperative stimulation locations closest to the DBS contacts. We computed the distance between stimulation locations and atlas-based pyramidal tract (PT) and medial lemniscus (ML) masks. A leave-one-out cross-validation analysis was performed to determine the reliability of intraoperative testing in predicting postoperative thresholds while controlling for the distance from the relevant tracks.

RESULTS

Intraoperative testing reliably predicted (area under ROC >0.8) postoperative thresholds for tremor and rigidity improvements, as well as stimulation-induced motor contractions and paresthesias. The reliability was poor for improvement in bradykinesia.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative testing reliably predicts postoperative thresholds. These results are relevant during the informed consent process and patient counseling for DBS surgery. These will also guide the development of future methods for intraoperative feedback, especially during asleep DBS.