4.3 Article

A 3-year observation of excessive daytime sleepiness after subthalamic deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson's disease

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
卷 192, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105721

关键词

Excessive daytime sleepiness; Deep brain stimulation; Subthalamic nucleus; Parkinson's disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS) has a positive effect on sleep quality, but its effect on wake functions is controversial. This study evaluated the longitudinal changes of the quality of sleep and excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients undergoing STN DBS and identify which factors are associated with the presence of EDS before and after STN DBS. Patient and methods: A total of 33 PD patients who underwent bilateral STN DBS between July 2011 and October 2015 were recruited. We evaluated subjective sleep quality assessed by Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS) and EDS using Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) preoperatively and 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years postoperatively. Results: There is a significant improvement in PDSS, and a noticeable change occurs immediately after the surgery. After DBS, the number of patients with persistent EDS gradually decreased, but patients with newly developed EDS were added. Baseline ESS score was highly correlated with EDS at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively, and older age of PD onset was highly associated with EDS at 1 year after DBS. At 3 years after DBS, the total PDSS score is a main contributing factor for EDS. There was no significant difference in dopamine agonist dose (agonist LED) and levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) between groups with and without EDS at any time points. Conclusion: Bilateral STN DBS improves the subjective sleep quality, but EDS may improve or worsen. The risk factors for EDS change over time after STN DBS. Interestingly, dopaminergic medication did not affect EDS in DBS-treated PD patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据