BACKGROUND: In the United States, the most commonly used surgical treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease is the implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes within the subthalamic nucleus. However, DBS device programming remains difficult and is a possible source of decreased efficacy. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between local field potential (LFP) activities in the subthalamic nucleus and the therapeutic response to programming. METHODS: We recorded LFPs with macroelectrodes placed unilaterally for DBS in 4 PD patients, 3 weeks after implantation, before the start of log-term DBS. Power-frequency spectra were calculated for each of 7 possible electrode contacts or contact pairs, over multiple 5- to 10-minute quiet waking epochs and over 30-second epochs during hand movements. Subsequently, DBS devices were programmed, with testing to determine which electrode contacts or contact pairs demonstrated optimal therapeutic efficacy. RESULTS: For each patient, the contact pair found to provide optimal efficacy was associated with the highest energy in the beta (13-32 Hz) and gamma (48-220 Hz) bands during postoperative LFP recordings at rest and during hand movements. Activities in other frequency bands did not show significant correlations between LFP power and optimal electrode contacts. CONCLUSION: Postoperative subband analysis of LFP recordings in beta and gamma frequency ranges may be used to select optimal electrode contacts. These results indicate that LFP recordings from implanted DBS electrodes can provide important clues to guide the optimization of DBS therapy in individual patients.
BACKGROUND: In the United States, the most commonly used surgical treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease is the implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes within the subthalamic nucleus. However, DBS device programming remains difficult and is a possible source of decreased efficacy. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between local field potential (LFP) activities in the subthalamic nucleus and the therapeutic response to programming. METHODS: We recorded LFPs with macroelectrodes placed unilaterally for DBS in 4 PDpatients, 3 weeks after implantation, before the start of log-term DBS. Power-frequency spectra were calculated for each of 7 possible electrode contacts or contact pairs, over multiple 5- to 10-minute quiet waking epochs and over 30-second epochs during hand movements. Subsequently, DBS devices were programmed, with testing to determine which electrode contacts or contact pairs demonstrated optimal therapeutic efficacy. RESULTS: For each patient, the contact pair found to provide optimal efficacy was associated with the highest energy in the beta (13-32 Hz) and gamma (48-220 Hz) bands during postoperative LFP recordings at rest and during hand movements. Activities in other frequency bands did not show significant correlations between LFP power and optimal electrode contacts. CONCLUSION: Postoperative subband analysis of LFP recordings in beta and gamma frequency ranges may be used to select optimal electrode contacts. These results indicate that LFP recordings from implanted DBS electrodes can provide important clues to guide the optimization of DBS therapy in individual patients.
Authors: Andre Machado; Ali R Rezai; Brian H Kopell; Robert E Gross; Ashwini D Sharan; Alim-Louis Benabid Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Ron Levy; Peter Ashby; William D Hutchison; Anthony E Lang; Andres M Lozano; Jonathan O Dostrovsky Journal: Brain Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Philip A Starr; Chadwick W Christine; Philip V Theodosopoulos; Nadja Lindsey; Deborah Byrd; Anthony Mosley; William J Marks Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Michael S Okun; Ramon L Rodriguez; Kelly D Foote; Atchar Sudhyadhom; Frank Bova; Charles Jacobson; Brian Bello; Pamela Zeilman; Hubert H Fernandez Journal: Parkinsonism Relat Disord Date: 2008-03-05 Impact factor: 4.891
Authors: Nicholas Maling; Scott F Lempka; Zack Blumenfeld; Helen Bronte-Stewart; Cameron C McIntyre Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2018-07-18 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: A G Rouse; S R Stanslaski; P Cong; R M Jensen; P Afshar; D Ullestad; R Gupta; G F Molnar; D W Moran; T J Denison Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Zachary T Irwin; Mohammad Z Awad; Christopher L Gonzalez; Arie Nakhmani; J Nicole Bentley; Thomas A Moore; Kenneth G Smithson; Barton L Guthrie; Harrison C Walker Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Joshua E Aman; Luke A Johnson; David Escobar Sanabria; Jing Wang; Remi Patriat; Meghan Hill; Ethan Marshall; Colum D MacKinnon; Scott E Cooper; Lauren E Schrock; Michael C Park; Noam Harel; Jerrold L Vitek Journal: Neurobiol Dis Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 5.996
Authors: Flavie Torrecillos; Gerd Tinkhauser; Petra Fischer; Alexander L Green; Tipu Z Aziz; Thomas Foltynie; Patricia Limousin; Ludvic Zrinzo; Keyoumars Ashkan; Peter Brown; Huiling Tan Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2018-09-04 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: AnneMarie K Brinda; Alex M Doyle; Madeline Blumenfeld; Jordan Krieg; Joseph S R Alisch; Chelsea Spencer; Emily Lecy; Lucius K Wilmerding; Adele DeNicola; Luke A Johnson; Jerrold L Vitek; Matthew D Johnson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Anusha Allawala; Kelly R Bijanki; Wayne Goodman; Jeffrey F Cohn; Ashwin Viswanathan; Daniel Yoshor; David A Borton; Nader Pouratian; Sameer A Sheth Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 4.654