The role of intraoperative microelectrode recording and stimulation in subthalamic lead placement for Parkinson’s disease

2020 | journal article. A publication with affiliation to the University of Göttingen.

Jump to: Cite & Linked | Documents & Media | Details | Version history

Cite this publication

​The role of intraoperative microelectrode recording and stimulation in subthalamic lead placement for Parkinson’s disease​
Malinova, V. ; Pinter, A.; Dragaescu, C.; Rohde, V. ; Trenkwalder, C. ; Sixel-Döring, F. & Eckardstein, K. L. von ​ (2020) 
PLoS One15(11) art. e0241752​.​ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241752 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.g001 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.g002 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.g003 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.g004 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.g005 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.s001 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.r001 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.r002 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.r003 10.1371/journal.pone.0241752.r004 

Documents & Media

journal.pone.0241752.pdf1.19 MBAdobe PDF

License

Published Version

Special user license Goescholar License

Details

Authors
Malinova, Vesna ; Pinter, Anabel; Dragaescu, Cristina; Rohde, Veit ; Trenkwalder, Claudia ; Sixel-Döring, Friederike; Eckardstein, Kajetan L. von 
Abstract
Objective Intraoperative microelectrode recording (MER) and test-stimulation are regarded as the gold standard for proper placement of subthalamic (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes in Parkinson’s disease (PD), requiring the patient to be awake during the procedure. In accordance with good clinical practice, most attending neurologists will request the clinically most efficacious trajectory for definite lead placement. However, the necessity of microelectrode-test-stimulation is disputed, as it may limit the access to DBS therapy, excluding those not willing or incapable of undergoing awake surgery. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the MERs and microelectrode-test-stimulation results with regard to the decision on definite lead placement and clinical outcome in a cohort of 67 PD-patients with STN-DBS. All patients received bilateral quadripolar ring electrodes. To ascertain overall procedural efficacy, we calculated the surgical index (SI) by comparing preoperative motor improvement induced by levodopa to that induced by stimulation 7 to 18 months after surgery, measured as the relative difference between ON and OFF-states on the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale motor part (UPDRS-3). Additionally, a side-specific surgical index (SSSI) was calculated using the unilateral assessable items of the UPDRS-3. The SSSI where microelectrode-test-stimulation overruled MER were compared to those where the result of microelectrode-test-stimulation was congruent to MER results. Results A total of 134 electrodes were analyzed. For final lead placement, the central trajectory was chosen in 54% of patient hemispheres. The mean SI was 0.99 (± 0.24). SSSI averaged 1.04 (± 0.45). In 37 lead placements, microelectrode-test-stimulation overruled MER in the final trajectory selection, in 27 of these lead placements adverse effects during microelectrode-test-stimulation were decisive. Neither the number of test electrodes used nor the STN-signal length had an impact on the SSSI. The SSSI did not differ between lead placements with MER/microelectrode-test-stimulation congruency and those where the results of microelectrode-test-stimulation initiated lead placement in a trajectory with shorter STN signal. Conclusion Intraoperative testing is mandatory to ensure an optimal motor outcome of STN DBS in PD-patients when using quadripolar ring electrodes. However, we also demonstrated that neither the length of the STN-signal on MER nor the number of test electrodes influenced the motor outcome.
Issue Date
2020
Journal
PLoS One 
Organization
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen 
eISSN
1932-6203
Language
English
Sponsor
Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2020

Reference

Citations


Social Media