Clinical ResearchCombined Deep Brain Stimulation of Subthalamic Nucleus and Ventral Intermediate Thalamic Nucleus in Tremor-Dominant Parkinson’s Disease Using a Parietal Approach
Section snippets
INTRODUCTION
Since its introduction in the early 1990s, deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) has become an established treatment option in therapy-refractory Parkinson’s disease (PD) (1,2). So far, multiple studies, including randomized-controlled trials, have demonstrated the efficacy of electrical stimulation within this neuroanatomical target (3). However, an increasing body of literature has accumulated in recent years challenging the notion of stimulation within the STN proper,
Subjects and Rationale
From October 2015 to October 2016, 18 patients suffering from severe therapy-refractory PD underwent DBS treatment in the STN at our department. From this cohort, five patients (5:0 male/female) with a tdPD history ranging from 4 to 9 years that received DBS of STN and VIM via a parietal approach were retrospectively evaluated (Table 1). Their median age at the time of surgery was 66.00 years (range: 50–62 years); the median tdPD history was 7.00 years (range: 5–9 years). In all cases,
RESULTS
DBS was performed successfully in all five patients (N = 10 leads). While electrode contacts could be placed in both STN and VIM in patients 1–4, anteroventral positioning of DBS leads in patient 5 prevented impeded stimulation within VIM. No adverse events related to electrode placement were observed.
Tables 3 and 4 give an overview of patients’ baseline characteristics and outcome of simultaneous STN/VIM stimulation during follow-up as measured by clinical scales. Severity of motor symptoms as
DISCUSSION
To date, different approaches have been undertaken to target both STN and the cerebellothalamic system in tdPD. Herein, the employment of a parietal approach is not a new concept, but finds anecdotal mention throughout the lesional era as well as in the current context of DBS. In the late 1950s, Guiot first described the employment of a single trajectory in the treatment of PD aiming to lesion both, the thalamus and the pallidum (25). In subsequent procedures, Gillingham et al. replicated the
CONCLUSION
Overall, the employment of a parietal approach proved feasible and safe in all patients in this retrospective study. However, further research and studies including larger patient populations are necessary to clearly and reliably determine whether combined VIM/STN stimulation affords better control over tremor symptoms than DBS in alternative targets (namely PSA and Fields of Forel) and hence justifies the increased potential risks associated with the alternative approach.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Brainlab for their courtesy on the use of 3D software under clinical investigation. We thank Gavin Elias for help in preparing the schematic representations.
Authorship Statement
Dr. Neudorfer designed the study, collected and analyzed the data, wrote the manuscript, reviewed, and approved the final version. Drs. Hinzke, Hunsche, and El Majdoub analyzed the data, reviewed, and approved the final version of the manuscript. Dr. Lozano reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. Dr.
REFERENCES (43)
- et al.
Effect of parkinsonian signs and symptoms of bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation
Lancet
(1995) - et al.
Long-term suppression of tremor by chronic stimulation of the ventral intermediate thalamic nucleus
Lancet
(1991) - et al.
Law and ethics of deep brain stimulation
Int J Law Psychiatry
(2012) - et al.
Essential tremor and tremor in Parkinson’s disease are associated with distinct “tremor clusters” in the ventral thalamus
Exp Neurol
(2012) - et al.
Treatments for dysarthria in Parkinson’s disease
Lancet Neurol
(2004) - et al.
Speech outcomes in Parkinson’s disease after subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation: a systematic review
Parkinsonism and Related Disorders
(2016) - et al.
Topography of cortical and subcortical connections of the human pedunculopontine and subthalamic nuclei
Neuroimage
(2007) - et al.
Effects of the stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in Parkinson disease
Rev Neurol (Paris)
(1993) - et al.
A randomized trial of deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease
N Engl J Med
(2006) - et al.
Bilateral high-frequency stimulation in the subthalamic nucleus for the treatment of Parkinson disease: correlation of therapeutic effect with anatomical electrode position
J Neurosurg
(2002)
Stimulation of the caudal zona incerta is superior to stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in improving contralateral parkinsonism
Brain
Neuroanatomical background and functional considerations for stereotactic interventions in the H fields of Forel
Brain Struct Funct
Localization of electrodes in the subthalamic nucleus on magnetic resonance imaging
J Neurosurg
The posterior subthalamic area in the treatment of movement disorders: past, present, and future
Neurosurgery
Treatment of Parkinson tremor by chronic stimulation of the ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus
Rev Neurol (Paris)
Long term safety and efficacy of unilateral deep brain stimulation of the thalamus for parkinsonian tremor
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry
Thalamic deep brain stimulation for tremor in Parkinson disease, essential tremor, and dystonia
Neurology
Concurrent bilateral vim and STN DBS in a patient with ET/PD
Neurology
Combined thalamic and subthalamic deep brain stimulation for tremor-dominant Parkinson’s disease
Acta Neurochir
Subthalamic nucleus stimulation in tremor dominant parkinsonian patients with previous thalamic surgery
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry
Deep brain stimulation for essential tremor. Consensus recommendations of the German deep brain stimulation association
Nervenarzt
Cited by (0)
For more information on author guidelines, an explanation of our peer review process, and conflict of interest informed consent policies, please go to www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-301854.html
Source(s) of Financial Support: Clemens Neudorfer is supported by a grant provided by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG NE 2276/1–1). The authors have no personal financial or institutional interest in any of the drugs, materials, or devices described in this article.