Daniel Kroneberg1, Philip Plettig1, Gerd-Helge Schneider2, Andrea A Kühn1,3,4,5. 1. Department of Neurology, Charité Campus Mitte, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Charité Campus Mitte, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 3. NeuroCure, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 4. Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 5. German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between motor cortical plasticity, intracortical inhibition, and clinical response to pallidal deep brain stimulation (DBS) in patients with cervical dystonia (CD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Response to paired associative stimulation (PAS) and short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) were assessed in patients with CD before and after three months of DBS and correlated with severity of dystonic symptoms as assessed by Toronto-Western-Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) severity score. Relations of electrophysiological parameters with clinical improvement were explored with correlation analysis. RESULTS: Patients with higher levels of plasticity before surgery showed higher symptom severity (R = 0.83, p = 0.008) but had also the larger clinical benefit following DBS (R = 0.88, p = 0.003). This correlation was independent from preoperative (preOP) TWSTRS motor score as revealed by partial correlation analysis. Intracortical inhibition was not altered in CD and not related to clinical outcome after DBS. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that a high degree of preOP plasticity is associated with higher symptom severity, underlining the role of abnormal plasticity in the pathophysiology of dystonia. At the same time individual degree of plasticity may drive reestablishment of normal motor programs, leading to better clinical outcome with DBS. The latter suggests that individual PAS-response may indicate the susceptibility for neuromodulatory processes as an important factor for clinical DBS effects. It might therefore serve as a neurophysiological marker to predict outcome and guide patient selection.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between motor cortical plasticity, intracortical inhibition, and clinical response to pallidal deep brain stimulation (DBS) in patients with cervical dystonia (CD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Response to paired associative stimulation (PAS) and short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) were assessed in patients with CD before and after three months of DBS and correlated with severity of dystonic symptoms as assessed by Toronto-Western-Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) severity score. Relations of electrophysiological parameters with clinical improvement were explored with correlation analysis. RESULTS: Patients with higher levels of plasticity before surgery showed higher symptom severity (R = 0.83, p = 0.008) but had also the larger clinical benefit following DBS (R = 0.88, p = 0.003). This correlation was independent from preoperative (preOP) TWSTRS motor score as revealed by partial correlation analysis. Intracortical inhibition was not altered in CD and not related to clinical outcome after DBS. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that a high degree of preOP plasticity is associated with higher symptom severity, underlining the role of abnormal plasticity in the pathophysiology of dystonia. At the same time individual degree of plasticity may drive reestablishment of normal motor programs, leading to better clinical outcome with DBS. The latter suggests that individual PAS-response may indicate the susceptibility for neuromodulatory processes as an important factor for clinical DBS effects. It might therefore serve as a neurophysiological marker to predict outcome and guide patient selection.
Authors: Takashi Tsuboi; Joshua K Wong; Leonardo Almeida; Christopher W Hess; Aparna Wagle Shukla; Kelly D Foote; Michael S Okun; Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora Journal: J Neurol Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Andreas Horn; Ningfei Li; Till A Dembek; Ari Kappel; Chadwick Boulay; Siobhan Ewert; Anna Tietze; Andreas Husch; Thushara Perera; Wolf-Julian Neumann; Marco Reisert; Hang Si; Robert Oostenveld; Christopher Rorden; Fang-Cheng Yeh; Qianqian Fang; Todd M Herrington; Johannes Vorwerk; Andrea A Kühn Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Julius Kricheldorff; Katharina Göke; Maximilian Kiebs; Florian H Kasten; Christoph S Herrmann; Karsten Witt; Rene Hurlemann Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2022-07-15
Authors: Codrin Lungu; Laurie Ozelius; David Standaert; Mark Hallett; Beth-Anne Sieber; Christine Swanson-Fisher; Brian D Berman; Nicole Calakos; Jennifer C Moore; Joel S Perlmutter; Sarah E Pirio Richardson; Rachel Saunders-Pullman; Laura Scheinfeldt; Nutan Sharma; Roy Sillitoe; Kristina Simonyan; Philip A Starr; Anna Taylor; Jerrold Vitek Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Christian Blahak; Marc E Wolf; Assel Saryyeva; Hansjoerg Baezner; Joachim K Krauss Journal: J Neural Transm (Vienna) Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Anne J Blood; John K Kuster; Jeff L Waugh; Jacob M Levenstein; Trisha J Multhaupt-Buell; Lewis R Sudarsky; Hans C Breiter; Nutan Sharma Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2019-04-04 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Marenka Smit; Alberto Albanese; Monika Benson; Mark J Edwards; Holm Graessner; Michael Hutchinson; Robert Jech; Joachim K Krauss; Francesca Morgante; Belen Pérez Dueñas; Richard B Reilly; Michele Tinazzi; Maria Fiorella Contarino; Marina A J Tijssen Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Simone Zittel; Ute Hidding; Maria Trumpfheller; Vanessa Lupici Baltzer; Alessandro Gulberti; Miriam Schaper; Maxine Biermann; Carsten Buhmann; Andreas K Engel; Christian Gerloff; Manfred Westphal; Jana Stadler; Johannes A Köppen; Monika Pötter-Nerger; Christian K E Moll; Wolfgang Hamel Journal: J Neurol Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 4.849