-
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 Parkinson's Disease 2022STN-DBS is a cornerstone in the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). The traditional approach is to use an awake operative technique with microelectrode... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
STN-DBS is a cornerstone in the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). The traditional approach is to use an awake operative technique with microelectrode recording (MER). However, more centers start using an asleep MRI-guided technique without MER.
OBJECTIVE
We systematically reviewed the literature to compare STN-DBS surgery with and without MER for differences in clinical outcome.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases for randomized clinical trials and consecutive cohort studies published between 01-01-2000 and 26-08-2021, that included at least 10 PD patients who had received bilateral STN-DBS.
RESULTS
2,129 articles were identified. After abstract screening and full-text review, 26 studies were included in the final analysis, comprising a total of 34 study groups (29 MER and 5 non-MER). The standardized mean difference (SMD) in change in motor symptoms between baseline (OFF medication) and 6-24 months follow-up (OFF medication and ON stimulation) was 1.64 for the MER group and 1.87 for non-MER group (p = 0.59). SMD in change in levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) was 1.14 for the MER group and 0.65 for non-MER group (p < 0.01). Insufficient data were available for comparative analysis of PDQ-39 and complications.
CONCLUSION
The change in motor symptoms from baseline to follow-up did not differ between studies that used MER and those that did not. The postoperative reduction in LEDD from baseline to follow-up was greater in the MER-group. In the absence of high-quality studies comparing both methods, there is a clear need for a well-designed comparative trial.
Topics: Deep Brain Stimulation; Humans; Levodopa; Microelectrodes; Parkinson Disease; Subthalamic Nucleus; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35912752
DOI: 10.3233/JPD-223333