Pallidal Neurostimulation Research Articles

Marie Vidailhet: recognising the importance of teamwork

The city of Toulouse in southern France is filled with a rich history of heroes, adventure, and challenges; where Concorde made its first test flight and the French National Centre for Space Studies obtained stunning satellite images of Earth. It is also the birthplace of Marie Vidailhet, professor of neurology and head of the Movement Disorders and Parkinson's Disease department at the Salpêtrière Hospital—the “cradle of neurology” in France (Sorbonne University, Paris). Bilateral, pallidal, deep-brain stimulation in primary generalised dystonia: a prospective 3 year follow-up studyBilateral pallidal stimulation provides sustained motor benefit after 3 years. Mild long-term improvements in quality of life and attention were also observed. Full-Text PDF Bilateral pallidal deep brain stimulation for the treatment of patients with dystonia-choreoathetosis cerebral palsy: a prospective pilot studyBilateral pallidal neurostimulation could be an effective treatment option for patients with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP. However, given the heterogeneity of motor outcomes and the small sample size, results should be interpreted with caution. The optimum placement of the leads seemed to be a crucial, but not exclusive, factor that could affect a good outcome. Full-Text PDF

Pallidal deep brain stimulation in primary Meige syndrome: clinical outcomes and psychiatric features

ObjectivesTo study the efficacy and safety of bilateral globus pallidus internus deep brain stimulation (GPi-DBS) in refractory Meige syndrome (MS) and evaluate the psychiatric disorders before and after surgery.MethodsTwenty-two patients...

Beneficial nonmotor effects of subthalamic and pallidal neurostimulation in Parkinson’s disease

BackgroundSubthalamic (STN) and pallidal (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) improve quality of life, motor, and nonmotor symptoms (NMS) in advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD). However, few studies have compared their nonmotor effects. ObjectiveTo compare nonmotor effects of STN-DBS and GPi-DBS. MethodsIn this prospective, observational, multicenter study including 60 PD patients undergoing bilateral STN-DBS (n = 40) or GPi-DBS (n = 20), we examined PDQuestionnaire (PDQ), NMSScale (NMSS), Unified PD Rating Scale-activities of daily living, -motor impairment, -complications (UPDRS-II, –III, -IV), Hoehn&Yahr, Schwab&England Scale, and levodopa-equivalent daily dose (LEDD) preoperatively and at 6-month follow-up. Intra-group changes at follow-up were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed-rank or paired t-test, if parametric tests were applicable, and corrected for multiple comparisons. Inter-group differences were explored with Mann-Whitney-U/unpaired t-tests. Analyses were performed before and after propensity score matching which balanced out demographic and preoperative clinical characteristics. Strength of clinical changes was assessed with effect size. ResultsIn both groups, PDQ, UPDRS-II, -IV, Schwab&England Scale, and NMSS improved significantly at follow-up. STN-DBS was significantly better for LEDD reduction, GPi-DBS for UPDRS-IV. While NMSS total score outcomes were similar, explorative NMSS domain analyses revealed distinct profiles: Both targets improved sleep/fatigue and mood/cognition, but only STN-DBS the miscellaneous (pain/olfaction) and attention/memory and only GPi-DBS cardiovascular and sexual function domains. ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to report distinct patterns of beneficial nonmotor effects of STN-DBS and GPi-DBS in PD. This study highlights the importance of NMS assessments to tailor DBS target choices to patients’ individual motor and nonmotor profiles.

Probabilistic mapping of the antidystonic effect of pallidal neurostimulation: a multicentre imaging study.

Deep brain stimulation of the internal globus pallidus is a highly effective and established therapy for primary generalized and cervical dystonia, but therapeutic success is compromised by a non-responder rate of up to 25%, even in carefully-selected groups. Variability in electrode placement and inappropriate stimulation settings may account for a large proportion of this outcome variability. Here, we present probabilistic mapping data on a large cohort of patients collected from several European centres to resolve the optimal stimulation volume within the pallidal region. A total of 105 dystonia patients with pallidal deep brain stimulation were enrolled and 87 datasets (43 with cervical dystonia and 44 with generalized dystonia) were included into the subsequent 'normative brain' analysis. The average improvement of dystonia motor score was 50.5 ± 30.9% in cervical and 58.2 ± 48.8% in generalized dystonia, while 19.5% of patients did not respond to treatment (<25% benefit). We defined probabilistic maps of anti-dystonic effects by aggregating individual electrode locations and volumes of tissue activated (VTA) in normative atlas space and ranking voxel-wise for outcome distribution. We found a significant relation between motor outcome and the stimulation volume, but not the electrode location per se. The highest probability of stimulation induced motor benefit was found in a small volume covering the ventroposterior globus pallidus internus and adjacent subpallidal white matter. We then used the aggregated VTA-based outcome maps to rate patient individual VTAs and trained a linear regression model to predict individual outcomes. The prediction model showed robustness between the predicted and observed clinical improvement, with an r2 of 0.294 (P < 0.0001). The predictions deviated on average by 16.9 ± 11.6 % from observed dystonia improvements. For example, if a patient improved by 65%, the model would predict an improvement between 49% and 81%. Results were validated in an independent cohort of 10 dystonia patients, where prediction and observed benefit had a correlation of r2 = 0.52 (P = 0.02) and a mean prediction error of 10.3% (±8.9). These results emphasize the potential of probabilistic outcome brain mapping in refining the optimal therapeutic volume for pallidal neurostimulation and advancing computer-assisted planning and programming of deep brain stimulation.

Pallidal neurostimulation versus botulinum toxin injections in the treatment of cervical dystonia: protocol of a randomized, sham-controlled trial (StimTox-CD)

BackgroundSelective peripheral denervation via botulinum neurotoxin injections into dystonic muscles is the first-line treatment for cervical dystonia. Pallidal neurostimulation is a potent alternative, but currently restricted to patients failing on neurotoxin therapy. As botulinum neurotoxin is partially effective but often unsatisfactory in a relevant proportion of patients, earlier neurostimulation might be advantageous in providing stable symptom control and preventing disability. This trial intends to demonstrate, that pallidal neurostimulation is superior to neurotoxin injections in best clinical practice for controlling the symptoms of cervical dystonia and that it is safe in patients with a partial therapy response to peripheral denervation. We hypothesize a better outcome in everyday functioning and health-related quality of life of neurostimulated patients.MethodsWe aim to recruit 66 cervical dystonia patients into a double-blind comparison of pallidal neurostimulation versus botulinum neurotoxin type A. Eligible patients need ≥25% motor symptom reduction 4 weeks after a neurotoxin test injection, but are willing to undergo DBS surgery due to unsatisfactory symptom control. All participants will be implanted with a DBS system, and randomized into 2 groups: First group will receive effective neurostimulation and saline injections into dystonic muscles. Second group is treated with regular neurotoxin injections and undergoes a sham-stimulation. Primary outcome is the change in TWSTRS total score between baseline and 6 months of therapy. Secondary outcome parameters are corresponding changes in TWSTRS motor score, Tsui score, CDQ-24 and SF-36. Safety will be assessed by frequency and severity of reported adverse events. Statistical analysis includes intention-to-treat and per protocol populations, analysis based on imputation of missing values and analysis adjusting for differences in baseline TWSTRS. After 6 months of blinded treatment all patients will receive open-label neurostimulation and neurotoxin treatment as needed, and are followed up 48 weeks after randomization.PerspectiveWe will assess if pallidal neurostimulation is a safe and effective alternative to selective peripheral denervation by botulinum toxin injections in cervical dystonia, which may be offered earlier in the course of disease based on patient preference. A positive study outcome would influence future treatment guidelines of cervical dystonia.Trial registrationEudraCT registration number: 2016–001378-13

Neurostimulation in tardive dystonia/dyskinesia: A delayed start, sham stimulation-controlled randomized trial

IntroductionGrowing evidence suggests that pallidal deep brain stimulation represents a potential new therapeutic avenue in tardive dystonia/dyskinesia, but controlled and blinded randomized studies (RCT) are missing. The present RCT compares dystonia/dyskinesia severity of pallidal neurostimulation in patients with tardive dystonia using a delayed-start design paradigm. MethodsDystonia/dyskinesia severity was assessed via blinded videos following pallidal neurostimulation at 3 (blinded phase) and 6 months (open extension phase). Primary endpoint was the percentage change of dystonia severity (Burke-Fahn-Marsden-Dystonia-Rating-Scale, BFMDRS) at 3 months between active vs. sham neurostimulation using blinded-video assessment. Secondary endpoints comprised clinical rating scores for movement disorders. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00331669. ResultsTwenty-five patients were randomized (1:1) to active (n = 12) or sham neurostimulation (n = 13). In the intention-to-treat analyses the between group difference of dystonia severity (BFMDRS) between active vs. sham stimulation was not significant at 3 months. Three months post-randomisation dystonia severity improved significantly within the neurostimulation by 22.8% and non-significantly within the sham group (12.0%) compared to their respective baseline severity. During the open-label extension with both groups being actively treated, significant and pronounced improvements of 41.5% were observed via blinded evaluation. Adverse events (n = 10) occurred in 10/25 of patients during the 6 months, mostly related to surgical implantation of the device; all resolved without sequelae. ConclusionThe primary endpoint of this randomized trial was not significant, most likely due to incomplete recruitment. However, pronounced improvements of most secondary endpoints at 3 and 6 months provide evidence for efficacy and safety of pallidal neurostimulation in tardive dystonia.

Deep Brain Stimulation for the Dystonias: Evidence, Knowledge Gaps, and Practical Considerations.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the globus pallidus internus (GPi-DBS) is among the most effective treatment options for dystonias. Because the term "dystonia" is defined by a characteristic phenomenology of involuntary muscle contractions, which may present with a large clinical and pathogenetic heterogeneity, decision making for or against GPi-DBS can be difficult in individual patients. A search of the PubMed database for research and review articles, focused on "deep brain stimulation" and "dystonia" was used to identify clinical trials and to determine current concepts in the surgical management of dystonia. Patient selection in previous studies was recategorized by the authors using the new dystonia classification put forward by a consensus committee of experts in dystonia research. The evidence and knowledge gaps are summarized and commented by the authors taking into account expert opinion and personal clinical experience for providing practical guidance in patient selection for DBS in dystonia. The literature review shows that pallidal deep brain stimulation is most effective in patients with isolated dystonia irrespective of the underlying etiology. In contrast, patients with combined dystonias are less likely to benefit from DBS, because the associated neurological symptoms (e.g., hypotonia or ataxia), with the exception of myoclonus, do not respond to pallidal neurostimulation. It is important to recognize the clinical features of dystonia, because the distinction between isolated and combined dystonia syndromes may predict the treatment response to pallidal deep brain stimulation. The aim of this review is to help guide clinicians with advising patients about deep brain stimulation therapy for dystonia and refering appropriate candidates to surgical centers.

Pallidal neurostimulation in patients with medication-refractory cervical dystonia: a randomised, sham-controlled trial

Cervical dystonia is managed mainly by repeated botulinum toxin injections. We aimed to establish whether pallidal neurostimulation could improve symptoms in patients not adequately responding to chemodenervation or oral drug treatment. In this randomised, sham-controlled trial, we recruited patients with cervical dystonia from centres in Germany, Norway, and Austria. Eligible patients (ie, those aged 18-75 years, disease duration ≥3 years, Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale [TWSTRS] severity score ≥15 points) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive active neurostimulation (frequency 180 Hz; pulse width 120 μs; amplitude 0·5 V below adverse event threshold) or sham stimulation (amplitude 0 V) by computer-generated randomisation lists with randomly permuted block lengths stratified by centre. All patients, masked to treatment assignment, were implanted with a deep brain stimulation device and received their assigned treatment for 3 months. Neurostimulation was activated in the sham group at 3 months and outcomes were reassessed in all patients after 6 months of active treatment. Treating physicians were not masked. The primary endpoint was the change in the TWSTRS severity score from baseline to 3 months, assessed by two masked dystonia experts using standardised videos, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00148889. Between Jan 19, 2006, and May 29, 2008, we recruited 62 patients, of whom 32 were randomly assigned to neurostimulation and 30 to sham stimulation. Outcome data were recorded in 60 (97%) patients at 3 months and 56 (90%) patients at 6 months. At 3 months, the reduction in dystonia severity was significantly greater with neurostimulation (-5·1 points [SD 5·1], 95% CI -7·0 to -3·5) than with sham stimulation (-1·3 [2·4], -2·2 to -0·4, p=0·0024; mean between-group difference 3·8 points, 1·8 to 5·8) in the intention-to-treat population. Over the course of the study, 21 adverse events (five serious) were reported in 11 (34%) of 32 patients in the neurostimulation group compared with 20 (11 serious) in nine (30%) of 30 patients in the sham-stimulation group. Serious adverse events were typically related to the implant procedure or the implanted device, and 11 of 16 resolved without sequelae. Dysarthria (in four patients assigned to neurostimulation vs three patients assigned to sham stimulation), involuntary movements (ie, dyskinesia or worsening of dystonia; five vs one), and depression (one vs two) were the most common non-serious adverse events reported during the course of the study. Pallidal neurostimulation for 3 months is more effective than sham stimulation at reducing symptoms of cervical dystonia. Extended follow-up is needed to ascertain the magnitude and stability of chronic neurostimulation effects before this treatment can be recommended as routine for patients who are not responding to conventional medical therapy. Medtronic.

CLINCIAL INSIGHTS DERIVED FROM RODENT MODELS OF ANTIPSYCHOTIC-INDUCED METABOLIC PERTRUBATIONS

Cerebral palsy (CP) with dystonia-choreoathetosis is a common cause of disability in children and in adults, and responds poorly to medical treatment. Bilateral pallidal deep brain stimulation (BP-DBS) of the globus pallidus internus (GPi) is an effective treatment for primary dystonia, but the effect of this reversible surgical procedure on dystonia-choreoathetosis CP, which is a subtype of secondary dystonia, is unknown. Our aim was to test the effectiveness of BP-DBS in adults with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP.We did a multicentre prospective pilot study of BP-DBS in 13 adults with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP who had no cognitive impairment, little spasticity, and only slight abnormalities of the basal ganglia on MRI. The primary endpoint was change in the severity of dystonia-choreoathetosis after 1 year of neurostimulation, as assessed with the Burke–Fahn–Marsden dystonia rating scale. The accuracy of surgical targeting to the GPi was assessed masked to the results of neurostimulation. Analysis was by intention to treat.The mean Burke–Fahn–Marsden dystonia rating scale movement score improved from 44·2 (SD 21·1) before surgery to 34·7 (21·9) at 1 year post-operatively (p=0·009; mean improvement 24·4 [21·1]%, 95% CI 11·6–37·1). Functional disability, pain, and mental health-related quality of life were significantly improved. There was no worsening of cognition or mood. Adverse events were related to stimulation (arrest of the stimulator in one patient, and an adjustment to the current intensity in four patients). The optimum therapeutic target was the posterolateroventral region of the GPi. Little improvement was seen when the neurostimulation diffused to adjacent structures (mainly to the globus pallidus externus [GPe]).Bilateral pallidal neurostimulation could be an effective treatment option for patients with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP. However, given the heterogeneity of motor outcomes and the small sample size, results should be interpreted with caution. The optimum placement of the leads seemed to be a crucial, but not exclusive, factor that could affect a good outcome.National PHRC; Cerebral Palsy Foundation: Fondation Motrice/APETREIMC; French INSERM Dystonia National Network; Medtronic.

Motor outcome of dystonic camptocormia treated with pallidal neurostimulation

BackgroundDeep brain stimulation of the internal pallidum (GPi-DBS) is effective for various types of drug-refractory primary dystonias. Rare clinical forms as dystonic camptocormia may profit but available data are scarce. MethodsWe here report on a retrospective clinical assessment of three patients with primary dystonic camptocormia treated with GPi-DBS. ResultsAll three patients showed marked response to bilateral GPi-DBS within days to weeks after surgery which was preserved in the long-term (38–45 months after implantation: mean improvement 82% as rated on the Burke Fahn Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale, 89% in the subitem “trunk”). Two patients developed mild stimulation induced speech problems (stuttering or dysarthria) which resolved with reprogramming or were acceptable in return for the control of dystonic symptoms. ConclusionsThe diagnosis and treatment of camptocormia will continue to require expert knowledge in movement and neuromuscular disorders, but DBS may expand treatment options in this difficult patient population.

Pallidal deep brain stimulation in patients with primary generalised or segmental dystonia: 5-year follow-up of a randomised trial

Severe forms of primary dystonia are difficult to manage medically. We assessed the safety and efficacy of pallidal neurostimulation in patients with primary generalised or segmental dystonia prospectively followed up for 5 years in a controlled multicentre trial. In the parent trial, 40 patients were randomly assigned to either sham neurostimulation or neurostimulation of the internal globus pallidus for a period of 3 months and thereafter all patients completed 6 months of active neurostimulation. 38 patients agreed to be followed up annually after the activation of neurostimulation, including assessments of dystonia severity, pain, disability, and quality of life. The primary endpoint of the 5-year follow-up study extension was the change in dystonia severity at 3 years and 5 years as assessed by open-label ratings of the Burke-Fahn-Marsden dystonia rating scale (BFMDRS) motor score compared with the preoperative baseline and the 6-month visit. The primary endpoint was analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The original trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00142259). An intention-to-treat analysis including all patients from the parent trial showed significant improvements in dystonia severity at 3 years and 5 years compared with baseline, which corresponded to -20·8 points (SD 17·1; -47·9%; n=40) at 6 months; -26·5 points (19·7; -61·1%; n=31) at 3 years; and -25·1 points (21·3; -57·8%; n=32). The improvement from 6 months to 3 years (-5·7 points [SD 8·4]; -34%) was significant and sustained at the 5-year follow-up (-4·3 [10·4]). 49 new adverse events occurred between 6 months and 5 years. Dysarthria and transient worsening of dystonia were the most common non-serious adverse events. 21 adverse events were rated serious and were almost exclusively device related. One patient attempted suicide shortly after the 6-month visit during a depressive episode. All serious adverse events resolved without permanent sequelae. 3 years and 5 years after surgery, pallidal neurostimulation continues to be an effective and relatively safe treatment option for patients with severe idiopathic dystonia. This long-term observation provides further evidence in favour of pallidal neurostimulation as a first-line treatment for patients with medically intractable, segmental, or generalised dystonia. Medtronic.

Secondary failure after ten years of pallidal neurostimulation in a patient with advanced Parkinson’s disease

Deep-brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus and internal globus pallidus are both surgical options in advanced Parkinson's disease. The best target is still debated with data suggesting better motor outcome in subthalamic stimulation but higher rates of psychiatric problems. Failure of pallidal stimulation within the first 2 years has been described. Here, we report a patient with good response to pallidal neurostimulation who developed a secondary failure after 10 years of treatment which was successfully reversed by reimplanting the electrodes into the subthalamic nucleus. This case suggests that a controlled comparison of treatment efficacy of pallidal and subthalamic neurostimulation may require a very long follow-up period to yield reliable results.

Bilateral pallidal deep brain stimulation for the treatment of patients with dystonia-choreoathetosis cerebral palsy: a prospective pilot study

Cerebral palsy (CP) with dystonia-choreoathetosis is a common cause of disability in children and in adults, and responds poorly to medical treatment. Bilateral pallidal deep brain stimulation (BP-DBS) of the globus pallidus internus (GPi) is an effective treatment for primary dystonia, but the effect of this reversible surgical procedure on dystonia-choreoathetosis CP, which is a subtype of secondary dystonia, is unknown. Our aim was to test the effectiveness of BP-DBS in adults with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP. We did a multicentre prospective pilot study of BP-DBS in 13 adults with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP who had no cognitive impairment, little spasticity, and only slight abnormalities of the basal ganglia on MRI. The primary endpoint was change in the severity of dystonia-choreoathetosis after 1 year of neurostimulation, as assessed with the Burke-Fahn-Marsden dystonia rating scale. The accuracy of surgical targeting to the GPi was assessed masked to the results of neurostimulation. Analysis was by intention to treat. The mean Burke-Fahn-Marsden dystonia rating scale movement score improved from 44.2 (SD 21.1) before surgery to 34.7 (21.9) at 1 year post-operatively (p=0.009; mean improvement 24.4 [21.1]%, 95% CI 11.6-37.1). Functional disability, pain, and mental health-related quality of life were significantly improved. There was no worsening of cognition or mood. Adverse events were related to stimulation (arrest of the stimulator in one patient, and an adjustment to the current intensity in four patients). The optimum therapeutic target was the posterolateroventral region of the GPi. Little improvement was seen when the neurostimulation diffused to adjacent structures (mainly to the globus pallidus externus [GPe]). Bilateral pallidal neurostimulation could be an effective treatment option for patients with dystonia-choreoathetosis CP. However, given the heterogeneity of motor outcomes and the small sample size, results should be interpreted with caution. The optimum placement of the leads seemed to be a crucial, but not exclusive, factor that could affect a good outcome. National PHRC; Cerebral Palsy Foundation: Fondation Motrice/APETREIMC; French INSERM Dystonia National Network; Medtronic.

Bilateral pallidal neurostimulation—long-term motor and cognitive effects in primary generalized dystonia

Bilateral pallidal neurostimulation—long-term motor and cognitive effects in primary generalized dystonia

Pallidal Deep-Brain Stimulation in Primary Generalized or Segmental Dystonia

Neurostimulation of the internal globus pallidus has been shown to be effective in reducing symptoms of primary dystonia. We compared this surgical treatment with sham stimulation in a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Forty patients with primary segmental or generalized dystonia received an implanted device for deep-brain stimulation and were randomly assigned to receive either neurostimulation or sham stimulation for 3 months. The primary end point was the change from baseline to 3 months in the severity of symptoms, according to the movement subscore on the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (range, 0 to 120, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). Two investigators who were unaware of treatment status assessed the severity of dystonia by reviewing videotaped sessions. Subsequently, all patients received open-label neurostimulation; blinded assessment was repeated after 6 months of active treatment. Three months after randomization, the change from baseline in the mean (+/-SD) movement score was significantly greater in the neurostimulation group (-15.8+/-14.1 points) than in the sham-stimulation group (-1.4+/-3.8 points, P<0.001). During the open-label extension period, this improvement was sustained among patients originally assigned to the neurostimulation group, and patients in the sham-stimulation group had a similar benefit when they switched to active treatment. The combined analysis of the entire cohort after 6 months of neurostimulation revealed substantial improvement in all movement symptoms (except speech and swallowing), the level of disability, and quality of life, as compared with baseline scores. A total of 22 adverse events occurred in 19 patients, including 4 infections at the stimulator site and 1 lead dislodgment. The most frequent adverse event was dysarthria. Bilateral pallidal neurostimulation for 3 months was more effective than sham stimulation in patients with primary generalized or segmental dystonia. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00142259 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).