Literature DB >> 26600278

Can We Rely on Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging for Subthalamic Nucleus Identification in Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery?

Maarten Bot1, Lo Bour, Rob M de Bie, Maria Fiorella Contarino, P Richard Schuurman, Pepijn van den Munckhof.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) offers significantly improved visibility of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) compared with traditional T2-weighted imaging. However, it is unknown whether the representation of the nucleus on SWI corresponds to the neurophysiological location of the STN.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlation between the intraoperative electrophysiological activity of the STN and the representation of the nucleus on different magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences used for deep brain stimulation target planning.
METHODS: At stereotactic target depth, microelectrode recordings (MERs) of typical STN neuronal activity were mapped on 3 different preoperative MRI sequences: 1.5-T SWI, 1.5-T T2-weighted, and 3-T T2-weighted MRI. For each MRI sequence, it was determined whether the MER signal was situated inside or outside the contour of the STN.
RESULTS: A total of 196 MER tracks in 34 patients were evaluated. In 165 tracks (84%), typical electrophysiological STN activity was measured. MER activity was situated more consistently inside hypointense STN contour representation on 1.5- and 3-T T2-weighted images compared with SWI (99% and 100% vs 79%, respectively). The 21% incongruence of electrophysiological STN activity outside the STN contour on SWI was seen almost exclusively in the anterior and lateral microelectrode channels.
CONCLUSION: STN representation on SWI does not correspond to electrophysiological STN borders. SWI does not correctly display the lateral part of the STN. When aiming to target the superolateral sensorimotor part of the STN during deep brain stimulation surgery, SWI does not offer an advantage but a disadvantage compared with conventional T2. Future research is needed to determine whether these findings may also apply for high-field SWI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26600278     DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  6 in total

1.  Electrode Penetration of the Caudate Nucleus in Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery for Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Maarten Bot; Pepijn van den Munckhof; Ben A Schmand; Rob M A de Bie; P Richard Schuurman
Journal:  Stereotact Funct Neurosurg       Date:  2018-09-03       Impact factor: 1.875

2.  Defining the Dorsal STN Border Using 7.0-T MRI: A Comparison to Microelectrode Recordings and Lower Field Strength MRI.

Authors:  Maarten Bot; Okker Verhagen; Matthan Caan; Wouter V Potters; Y Dilai; Vincent J J Odekerken; Joke M Dijk; Rob M A de Bie; P Richard Schuurman; Pepijn van den Munckhof
Journal:  Stereotact Funct Neurosurg       Date:  2019-08-20       Impact factor: 1.875

Review 3.  Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: A Review and Future Outlook.

Authors:  Anahita Malvea; Farbod Babaei; Chadwick Boulay; Adam Sachs; Jeongwon Park
Journal:  Biomed Eng Lett       Date:  2022-04-19

Review 4.  Targeting of the Subthalamic Nucleus in Patients with Parkinson's Disease Undergoing Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery.

Authors:  Pepijn van den Munckhof; Maarten Bot; P Richard Schuurman
Journal:  Neurol Ther       Date:  2021-02-09

5.  Borders of STN determined by MRI versus the electrophysiological STN. A comparison using intraoperative CT.

Authors:  Sander Bus; Pepijn van den Munckhof; Maarten Bot; Gian Pal; Bichun Ouyang; Sepehr Sani; Leo Verhagen Metman
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2017-12-23       Impact factor: 2.216

6.  Deep Learning-Based Deep Brain Stimulation Targeting and Clinical Applications.

Authors:  Seong-Cheol Park; Joon Hyuk Cha; Seonhwa Lee; Wooyoung Jang; Chong Sik Lee; Jung Kyo Lee
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 4.677

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.