Luke A Johnson1, Shane D Nebeck1, Abirami Muralidharan1, Matthew D Johnson2, Kenneth B Baker1, Jerrold L Vitek3. 1. Department of Neurology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. Electronic address: vitek004@umn.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Incorporating feedback controls based on real-time measures of pathological brain activity may improve deep brain stimulation (DBS) approaches for the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). Excessive beta oscillations in subthalamic nucleus (STN) local field potentials (LFP) have been proposed as a potential biomarker for closed-loop DBS (CL-DBS). OBJECTIVE: In a non-human primate PD model we compared CL-DBS, which delivered stimulation only when STN LFP beta activity was elevated, to traditional continuous DBS (tDBS). METHODS: Therapeutic effects of CL-DBS and tDBS relative to the Off-DBS condition were evaluated via a clinical rating scale and objective measures of movement speed during a cued reaching task. RESULTS: CL-DBS was comparable to tDBS at reducing rigidity, while reducing the amount of time DBS was on by ≈50%; however, only tDBS improved bradykinesia during the reaching behavior. This was likely due to reach-related reductions in beta amplitude that influence the timing and duration of stimulation in the CL-DBS condition. CONCLUSION: These results illustrate the potential utility of closed-loop DBS devices for PD based on STN beta LFP levels. They also point to possible consequences in behavioral tasks when restricting real-time sensing to a single LFP frequency that itself is modulated during performance of such tasks. The present study provides data that suggest alternate algorithms or more than one physiological biomarker may be required to optimize the performance of behavioral tasks and demonstrates the value of using multiple objective measures when evaluating the efficacy of closed-loop DBS systems.
BACKGROUND: Incorporating feedback controls based on real-time measures of pathological brain activity may improve deep brain stimulation (DBS) approaches for the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). Excessive beta oscillations in subthalamic nucleus (STN) local field potentials (LFP) have been proposed as a potential biomarker for closed-loop DBS (CL-DBS). OBJECTIVE: In a non-human primate PD model we compared CL-DBS, which delivered stimulation only when STN LFP beta activity was elevated, to traditional continuous DBS (tDBS). METHODS: Therapeutic effects of CL-DBS and tDBS relative to the Off-DBS condition were evaluated via a clinical rating scale and objective measures of movement speed during a cued reaching task. RESULTS:CL-DBS was comparable to tDBS at reducing rigidity, while reducing the amount of time DBS was on by ≈50%; however, only tDBS improved bradykinesia during the reaching behavior. This was likely due to reach-related reductions in beta amplitude that influence the timing and duration of stimulation in the CL-DBS condition. CONCLUSION: These results illustrate the potential utility of closed-loop DBS devices for PD based on STN beta LFP levels. They also point to possible consequences in behavioral tasks when restricting real-time sensing to a single LFP frequency that itself is modulated during performance of such tasks. The present study provides data that suggest alternate algorithms or more than one physiological biomarker may be required to optimize the performance of behavioral tasks and demonstrates the value of using multiple objective measures when evaluating the efficacy of closed-loop DBS systems.
Authors: Andrew Sharott; Peter J Magill; Daniel Harnack; Andreas Kupsch; Wassilios Meissner; Peter Brown Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.386
Authors: Allison T Connolly; Abirami Muralidharan; Claudia Hendrix; Luke Johnson; Rahul Gupta; Scott Stanslaski; Tim Denison; Kenneth B Baker; Jerrold L Vitek; Matthew D Johnson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 5.379
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: A Priori; G Foffani; A Pesenti; F Tamma; A M Bianchi; M Pellegrini; M Locatelli; K A Moxon; R M Villani Journal: Exp Neurol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 5.330
Authors: Simon Little; Alex Pogosyan; Spencer Neal; Baltazar Zavala; Ludvic Zrinzo; Marwan Hariz; Thomas Foltynie; Patricia Limousin; Keyoumars Ashkan; James FitzGerald; Alexander L Green; Tipu Z Aziz; Peter Brown Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 10.422
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: David Escobar Sanabria; Luke A Johnson; Shane D Nebeck; Jianyu Zhang; Matthew D Johnson; Kenneth B Baker; Gregory F Molnar; Jerrold L Vitek Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 2.714
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