4.7 Article

Eight-hours adaptive deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson disease

Journal

NEUROLOGY
Volume 90, Issue 11, Pages E971-506

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005121

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Italian Ministry of Health [GR-2011-02352807]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives To assess the feasibility and clinical efficacy of local field potentials (LFPs)-based adaptive deep brain stimulation (aDBS) in patients with advanced Parkinson disease (PD) during daily activities in an open-label, nonblinded study. Methods We monitored neurophysiologic and clinical fluctuations during 2 perioperative experimental sessions lasting for up to 8 hours. On the first day, the patient took his/her daily medication, while on the second, he/she additionally underwent subthalamic nucleus aDBS driven by LFPs beta band power. Results The beta band power correlated in both experimental sessions with the patient's clinical state (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.506, p < 0.001, and r = 0.477, p < 0.001). aDBS after LFP changes was effective (30% improvement without medication [3-way analysis of variance, interaction day x medication p = 0.036; 30.5 +/- 3.4 vs 22.2 +/- 3.3, p = 0.003]), safe, and well tolerated in patients performing regular daily activities and taking additional dopaminergic medication. aDBS was able to decrease DBS amplitude during motor on states compared to off states (paired t test p = 0.046), and this automatic adjustment of STN-DBS prevented dyskinesias. Conclusions The main findings of our study are that aDBS is technically feasible in everyday life and provides a safe, well-tolerated, and effective treatment method for the management of clinical fluctuations. Classification of evidence This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with advanced PD, aDBS is safe, well tolerated, and effective in controlling PD motor symptoms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available