-
Medicine Apr 2024Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) is a viable therapeutic for advanced Parkinson's disease. However, the efficacy and safety of STN-DBS under local... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) is a viable therapeutic for advanced Parkinson's disease. However, the efficacy and safety of STN-DBS under local anesthesia (LA) versus general anesthesia (GA) remain controversial. This meta-analysis aims to compare them using an expanded sample size.
METHODS
The databases of Embase, Cochrane Library and Medline were systematically searched for eligible cohort studies published between 1967 and 2023. Clinical efficacy was assessed using either Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) section III scores or levodopa equivalent dosage requirements. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess complications (adverse effects related to stimulation, general neurological and surgical complications, and hardware-related complications).
RESULTS
Fifteen studies, comprising of 13 retrospective cohort studies and 2 prospective cohort studies, involving a total of 943 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicate that there were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regards to improvement in UPDRS III score or postoperative levodopa equivalent dosage requirement. However, subgroup analysis revealed that patients who underwent GA with intraoperative imaging had higher UPDRS III score improvement compared to those who received LA with microelectrode recording (MER) (P = .03). No significant difference was found in the improvement of UPDRS III scores between the GA group and LA group with MER. Additionally, there were no notable differences in the incidence rates of complications between these 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis indicates that STN-DBS performed under GA or LA have similar clinical outcomes and complications. Therefore, GA may be a suitable option for patients with severe symptoms who cannot tolerate the procedure under LA. Additionally, the GA group with intraoperative imaging showed better clinical outcomes than the LA group with MER. A more compelling conclusion would require larger prospective cohort studies with a substantial patient population and extended long follow-up to validate.
Topics: Humans; Deep Brain Stimulation; Parkinson Disease; Anesthesia, General; Subthalamic Nucleus; Anesthesia, Local; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38669414
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037955 -
Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 2024Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established surgical therapy for patients with Parkinsons' Disease (PD). Traditionally, DBS surgery for PD is performed under... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established surgical therapy for patients with Parkinsons' Disease (PD). Traditionally, DBS surgery for PD is performed under local anesthesia, whereby the patient is awake to facilitate intraoperative neurophysiological confirmation of the intended target using microelectrode recordings. General anesthesia allows for improved patient comfort without sacrificing anatomic precision and clinical outcomes.
METHODS
We performed a systemic review and meta-analysis on patients undergoing DBS for PD. Published randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies, and case series which compared asleep and awake techniques for patients undergoing DBS for PD were included. A total of 19 studies and 1,900 patients were included in the analysis.
RESULTS
We analyzed the (i) clinical effectiveness - postoperative UPDRS III score, levodopa equivalent daily doses and DBS stimulation requirements. (ii) Surgical and anesthesia related complications, number of lead insertions and operative time (iii) patient's quality of life, mood and cognitive measures using PDQ-39, MDRS, and MMSE scores. There was no significant difference in results between the awake and asleep groups, other than for operative time, for which there was significant heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
With the advent of newer technology, there is likely to have narrowing differences in outcomes between awake or asleep DBS. What would therefore be more important would be to consider the patient's comfort and clinical status as well as the operative team's familiarity with the procedure to ensure seamless transition and care.
Topics: Deep Brain Stimulation; Humans; Parkinson Disease; Wakefulness; Anesthesia, General; Treatment Outcome; Anesthesia
PubMed: 38636468
DOI: 10.1159/000536310 -
Journal of Neurosurgery Mar 2024Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for medically refractory movement disorders and other neurological conditions. To comprehensively characterize the...
OBJECTIVE
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for medically refractory movement disorders and other neurological conditions. To comprehensively characterize the prevalence, locations, timing of detection, clinical effects, and risk factors of DBS-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), the authors performed a systematic review of the published literature.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched using 2 concepts: cerebral hemorrhage and brain stimulation, with filters for English, human studies, and publication dates 1980-2023. The inclusion criteria were the use of DBS intervention for any human neurological condition, with documentation of hemorrhagic complications by location and clinical effect. Studies with non-DBS interventions, no documentation of hemorrhage outcome, patient cohorts of ≤ 10, and pediatric patients were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed using Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The authors performed proportional meta-analysis for ICH prevalence.
RESULTS
A total of 63 studies, with 13,056 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of ICH was 2.9% (fixed-effects model, 95% CI 2.62%-3.2%) per patient and 1.6% (random-effects model, 95% CI 1.34%-1.87%) per DBS lead, with 49.6% being symptomatic. The ICH rates did not change with time. ICH most commonly occurred around the DBS lead, with 16% at the entry point, 31% along the track, and 7% at the target. Microelectrode recording (MER) during DBS was associated with increased ICH rate compared to DBS without MER (3.5 ± 2.2 vs 2.1 ± 1.4; p[T ≤ t] 1-tail = 0.038). Other reported ICH risk factors include intraoperative systolic blood pressure > 140 mm Hg, sulcal DBS trajectories, and multiple microelectrode insertions. Sixty percent of ICH was detected at 24 hours postoperatively and 27% intraoperatively. The all-cause mortality rate of DBS was 0.4%, with ICH accounting for 22% of deaths. Single-surgeon DBS experience showed a weak inverse correlation (r = -0.27, p = 0.2189) between the rate of ICH per lead and the number of leads implanted per year.
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides level III evidence that MER during DBS is a risk factor for ICH. Other risk factors include intraoperative systolic blood pressure > 140 mm Hg, sulcal trajectories, and multiple microelectrode insertions. Avoidance of these risk factors may decrease the rate of ICH.
PubMed: 38518284
DOI: 10.3171/2024.1.JNS232385 -
Neuromodulation : Journal of the... Jun 2024Systematic review of the literature. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review of the literature.
OBJECTIVES
In recent years, brain-computer interface (BCI) has emerged as a potential treatment for patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). This is the first systematic review of the literature on invasive closed-loop BCI technologies for the treatment of SCI in humans.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Ovid EMBASE was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
RESULTS
Of 8316 articles collected, 19 studies met all the inclusion criteria. Data from 21 patients were extracted from these studies. All patients sustained a cervical SCI and were treated using either a BCI with intracortical microelectrode arrays (n = 18, 85.7%) or electrocorticography (n = 3, 14.3%). To decode these neural signals, machine learning and statistical models were used: support vector machine in eight patients (38.1%), linear estimator in seven patients (33.3%), Hidden Markov Model in three patients (14.3%), and other in three patients (14.3%). As the outputs, ten patients (47.6%) underwent noninvasive functional electrical stimulation (FES) with a cuff; one (4.8%) had an invasive FES with percutaneous stimulation, and ten (47.6%) used an external device (neuroprosthesis or virtual avatar). Motor function was restored in all patients for each assigned task. Clinical outcome measures were heterogeneous across all studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Invasive techniques of BCI show promise for the treatment of SCI, but there is currently no technology that can restore complete functional autonomy in patients with SCI. The current techniques and outcomes of BCI vary greatly. Because invasive BCIs are still in the early stages of development, further clinical studies should be conducted to optimize the prognosis for patients with SCI.
Topics: Spinal Cord Injuries; Humans; Brain-Computer Interfaces; Recovery of Function
PubMed: 37943244
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2023.10.006 -
Reviews in the Neurosciences Feb 2024In this systematic review, we address the status of intracortical brain-computer interfaces (iBCIs) applied to the motor cortex to improve function in patients with... (Review)
Review
In this systematic review, we address the status of intracortical brain-computer interfaces (iBCIs) applied to the motor cortex to improve function in patients with impaired motor ability. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Guidelines for Systematic Reviews. Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) were used to assess bias and quality. Advances in iBCIs in the last two decades demonstrated the use of iBCI to activate limbs for functional tasks, achieve neural typing for communication, and other applications. However, the inconsistency of performance metrics employed by these studies suggests the need for standardization. Each study was a pilot clinical trial consisting of 1-4, majority male (64.28 %) participants, with most trials featuring participants treated for more than 12 months (55.55 %). The systems treated patients with various conditions: amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, stroke, spinocerebellar degeneration without cerebellar involvement, and spinal cord injury. All participants presented with tetraplegia at implantation and were implanted with microelectrode arrays via pneumatic insertion, with nearly all electrode locations solely at the precentral gyrus of the motor cortex (88.88 %). The development of iBCI devices using neural signals from the motor cortex to improve motor-impaired patients has enhanced the ability of these systems to return ability to their users. However, many milestones remain before these devices can prove their feasibility for recovery. This review summarizes the achievements and shortfalls of these systems and their respective trials.
Topics: Humans; Male; Brain-Computer Interfaces; Electrodes, Implanted; Quadriplegia; Spinal Cord Injuries; Stroke
PubMed: 37845811
DOI: 10.1515/revneuro-2023-0077