Pawan V Rawal1, Leonardo Almeida1, Luke B Smelser1, He Huang1, Barton L Guthrie2, Harrison C Walker3. 1. Department of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. Electronic address: hcwalker@uab.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation has become a routine therapy for movement disorders, but it is relatively invasive and costly. Although stimulation intensity relates to battery longevity, less is known about how diagnosis and stimulation target contribute to this clinical outcome. Here we evaluate battery longevity in movement disorders patients who were treated at a tertiary referral center. OBJECTIVE: To compare single channel pulse generator longevity in patients with movement disorders. METHODS: With Institutional Review Board approval, we evaluated 470 consecutive Soletra implants for routine care. Battery longevity was estimated with Kaplan-Meier analyses, and group comparisons were performed with the log rank mean test. The frequency of clinic encounters for ongoing care was evaluated across diagnoses with analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The mean pulse generator longevity was 44.9 ± 1.4 months. Pallidal DBS for dystonia was associated with shorter battery longevity than subthalamic and thalamic DBS for Parkinson's disease and essential tremor (28.1 ± 2.1 versus 47.1 ± 1.8 and 47.8 ± 2.6 months, respectively, mean ± standard error, P < 0.001), and dystonia patients required more frequent clinic visits for routine care (F = 6.0, P = 0.003). Pallidal DBS for Parkinson's disease and thalamic DBS for cerebellar outflow tremor were associated with shorter battery longevity, as well (35.3 ± 4.6 and 26.4 ± 4.3 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pallidal DBS for dystonia was associated with shorter battery longevity and more frequent stimulator adjustments versus DBS for Parkinson's disease and essential tremor. Characteristics of the stimulation target and disease pathophysiology both likely contribute to battery longevity in patients with movement disorders.
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation has become a routine therapy for movement disorders, but it is relatively invasive and costly. Although stimulation intensity relates to battery longevity, less is known about how diagnosis and stimulation target contribute to this clinical outcome. Here we evaluate battery longevity in movement disorderspatients who were treated at a tertiary referral center. OBJECTIVE: To compare single channel pulse generator longevity in patients with movement disorders. METHODS: With Institutional Review Board approval, we evaluated 470 consecutive Soletra implants for routine care. Battery longevity was estimated with Kaplan-Meier analyses, and group comparisons were performed with the log rank mean test. The frequency of clinic encounters for ongoing care was evaluated across diagnoses with analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The mean pulse generator longevity was 44.9 ± 1.4 months. Pallidal DBS for dystonia was associated with shorter battery longevity than subthalamic and thalamic DBS for Parkinson's disease and essential tremor (28.1 ± 2.1 versus 47.1 ± 1.8 and 47.8 ± 2.6 months, respectively, mean ± standard error, P < 0.001), and dystoniapatients required more frequent clinic visits for routine care (F = 6.0, P = 0.003). Pallidal DBS for Parkinson's disease and thalamic DBS for cerebellar outflow tremor were associated with shorter battery longevity, as well (35.3 ± 4.6 and 26.4 ± 4.3 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pallidal DBS for dystonia was associated with shorter battery longevity and more frequent stimulator adjustments versus DBS for Parkinson's disease and essential tremor. Characteristics of the stimulation target and disease pathophysiology both likely contribute to battery longevity in patients with movement disorders.
Authors: Kenneth A Follett; Frances M Weaver; Matthew Stern; Kwan Hur; Crystal L Harris; Ping Luo; William J Marks; Johannes Rothlind; Oren Sagher; Claudia Moy; Rajesh Pahwa; Kim Burchiel; Penelope Hogarth; Eugene C Lai; John E Duda; Kathryn Holloway; Ali Samii; Stacy Horn; Jeff M Bronstein; Gatana Stoner; Philip A Starr; Richard Simpson; Gordon Baltuch; Antonio De Salles; Grant D Huang; Domenic J Reda Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael S Okun; Hubert H Fernandez; Samuel S Wu; Lindsey Kirsch-Darrow; Dawn Bowers; Frank Bova; Michele Suelter; Charles E Jacobson; Xinping Wang; Clifford W Gordon; Pam Zeilman; Janet Romrell; Pam Martin; Herbert Ward; Ramon L Rodriguez; Kelly D Foote Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Harrison C Walker; Michael Lyerly; Gary Cutter; Johnson Hagood; Natividad P Stover; Stephanie L Guthrie; Barton L Guthrie; Ray L Watts Journal: Parkinsonism Relat Disord Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 4.891
Authors: Leonardo Almeida; Pawan V Rawal; Benjamin Ditty; Bryan L Smelser; He Huang; Michael S Okun; Barton L Guthrie; Harrison C Walker Journal: Mov Disord Clin Pract Date: 2016-01-09