C Lungu1, P Malone1, T Wu2, P Ghosh1, B McElroy1, K Zaghloul3, T Patterson4, M Hallett5, Z Levine6. 1. NIH Parkinson Clinic, Office of the Clinical Director, NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 2. Clinical Neuroscience Program, NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 3. Surgical Neurology Branch, NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 4. Neuroscience Department, Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia, USA. 5. Medical Neurology Branch, NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 6. Neurosurgery Department, Holy Cross Hospital, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the temporal dynamics of tissue impedance after deep brain stimulation (DBS). BACKGROUND: DBS therapy commonly employs a constant voltage approach, and current delivery to the tissue is a function of electrode-tissue impedance. It is presumed that impedance fluctuates early postimplantation, with implications for variations in current delivery and therapeutic efficacy. We hypothesised that the largest variation will be recorded early after surgery, followed by stabilisation. METHODS: Review of impedance checks of implanted DBS systems at standard parameters during the first five months postimplantation. All measurement time points were binned into 1-week periods, and we used repeated measures analysis of variance with Tukey pairwise multiple comparisons correction. The analysis was repeated after normalising impedance values for each subject to that patient's baseline value. RESULTS: There was an initial (non-significant) drop in impedance at week 1, followed by significant increase at week 3 (p=0.0002). There were no further significant differences in impedance values at subsequent time points. Analysis of normalised data showed a significant difference between the initial measurement in postoperative week 1 (normalised value 1) and week 3 (normalised value 1.73, p<0.0001), with no further difference among the subsequent weekly points during the 5-month follow-up. No significant hourly variations were found at any time points. CONCLUSIONS: We found major changes in impedance within the first month postimplantation, with no further variation. This is an important confirmation in patients of this temporal dynamics of the impedance of implanted DBS hardware, with potential therapeutic implications. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVE: To study the temporal dynamics of tissue impedance after deep brain stimulation (DBS). BACKGROUND: DBS therapy commonly employs a constant voltage approach, and current delivery to the tissue is a function of electrode-tissue impedance. It is presumed that impedance fluctuates early postimplantation, with implications for variations in current delivery and therapeutic efficacy. We hypothesised that the largest variation will be recorded early after surgery, followed by stabilisation. METHODS: Review of impedance checks of implanted DBS systems at standard parameters during the first five months postimplantation. All measurement time points were binned into 1-week periods, and we used repeated measures analysis of variance with Tukey pairwise multiple comparisons correction. The analysis was repeated after normalising impedance values for each subject to that patient's baseline value. RESULTS: There was an initial (non-significant) drop in impedance at week 1, followed by significant increase at week 3 (p=0.0002). There were no further significant differences in impedance values at subsequent time points. Analysis of normalised data showed a significant difference between the initial measurement in postoperative week 1 (normalised value 1) and week 3 (normalised value 1.73, p<0.0001), with no further difference among the subsequent weekly points during the 5-month follow-up. No significant hourly variations were found at any time points. CONCLUSIONS: We found major changes in impedance within the first month postimplantation, with no further variation. This is an important confirmation in patients of this temporal dynamics of the impedance of implanted DBS hardware, with potential therapeutic implications. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Entities:
Keywords:
ELECTRICAL STIMULATION; MOVEMENT DISORDERS; NEUROSURGERY; PHYSIOLOGY
Authors: Günther Deuschl; Jan Herzog; Galit Kleiner-Fisman; Cynthia Kubu; Andres M Lozano; Kelly E Lyons; Maria C Rodriguez-Oroz; Filippo Tamma; Alexander I Tröster; Jerrold L Vitek; Jens Volkmann; Valerie Voon Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Michael S Okun; Bruno V Gallo; George Mandybur; Jonathan Jagid; Kelly D Foote; Fredy J Revilla; Ron Alterman; Joseph Jankovic; Richard Simpson; Fred Junn; Leo Verhagen; Jeff E Arle; Blair Ford; Robert R Goodman; R Malcolm Stewart; Stacy Horn; Gordon H Baltuch; Brian H Kopell; Frederick Marshall; Delea Peichel; Rajesh Pahwa; Kelly E Lyons; Alexander I Tröster; Jerrold L Vitek; Michele Tagliati Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Paul Krack; Alina Batir; Nadège Van Blercom; Stephan Chabardes; Valérie Fraix; Claire Ardouin; Adnan Koudsie; Patricia Dowsey Limousin; Abdelhamid Benazzouz; Jean François LeBas; Alim-Louis Benabid; Pierre Pollak Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-11-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nora Vanegas-Arroyave; Peter M Lauro; Ling Huang; Mark Hallett; Silvina G Horovitz; Kareem A Zaghloul; Codrin Lungu Journal: Brain Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Peter M Lauro; Nora Vanegas-Arroyave; Ling Huang; Paul A Taylor; Kareem A Zaghloul; Codrin Lungu; Ziad S Saad; Silvina G Horovitz Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2015-11-02 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Karl A Sillay; Solomon Ondoma; Brett Wingeier; Dominic Schomberg; Priyanka Sharma; Rahul Kumar; Gurwattan S Miranpuri; Justin Williams Journal: Ann Neurosci Date: 2019-01-14
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: Martin Sommer; Elisabeth Mirjam Stiksrud; Kajetan von Eckardstein; Veit Rohde; Walter Paulus Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2015-07-19 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: T A Khoa Nguyen; Milan Djilas; Andreas Nowacki; André Mercanzini; Michael Schüpbach; Philipp Renaud; Claudio Pollo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Joshua Wong; Aysegul Gunduz; Jonathan Shute; Robert Eisinger; Stephanie Cernera; Kwo Wei David Ho; Daniel Martinez-Ramirez; Leonardo Almeida; Christina A Wilson; Michael S Okun; Christopher W Hess Journal: Tremor Other Hyperkinet Mov (N Y) Date: 2018-03-26
Authors: Huichun Luo; Yongzhi Huang; Xueying Du; Yunpeng Zhang; Alexander L Green; Tipu Z Aziz; Shouyan Wang Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2018-04-11 Impact factor: 4.677