Joshua K Wong1, James H Cauraugh2, Kwo Wei David Ho1, Matthew Broderick1, Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora1, Leonardo Almeida1, Aparna Wagle Shukla1, Christina A Wilson1, Rob Ma de Bie3, Frances M Weaver4, Nyeonju Kang5, Michael S Okun6. 1. Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA. 2. Motor Behavior Laboratory, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 4. Hines Veterans Affairs Hospital, Center of Innovation for Complex Chronic Healthcare, Hines, IL, USA. 5. Division of Sport Science, Incheon National University, Incheon, South Korea. 6. Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA. Electronic address: okun@neurology.ufl.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) with globus pallidus interna (GPi) DBS for tremor suppression in Parkinson disease (PD). BACKGROUND: DBS is an effective surgical therapy that has been shown to provide significant benefit for motor symptoms in PD. Currently, two main structures targeted to treat motor complications in PD are the STN and GPi. Although some groups traditionally favor STN over GPi for tremor suppression, evidence demonstrating superiority in long-term tremor control is limited. METHODS: We performed a systematic review for all randomized trials comparing STN vs GPi DBS in PD that were published before March 2017. Five studies were examined in a random effects model meta-analysis. We conducted moderator variable analysis to determine if there was a treatment effect difference for STN versus GPi. RESULTS: We compared DBS ON versus OFF and found a significant overall standardized difference mean effect: Effect Size = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.316-0.395; P < 0.0001. These findings indicate that DBS reduced tremor symptoms in PD patients with a medium effect size. Moderator variable analysis of STN vs GPI revealed two significant standardized effect sizes: STN effect size = 0.38 and GPi effect size = 0.35. A Z-test showed that effect sizes between the STN and GPi were not significantly different (P = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: DBS is effective in reducing tremor in PD patients regardless of stimulation target. However, the degree of tremor suppression in STN DBS versus GPi DBS was equivalent.
OBJECTIVE: To compare subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) with globus pallidus interna (GPi) DBS for tremor suppression in Parkinson disease (PD). BACKGROUND: DBS is an effective surgical therapy that has been shown to provide significant benefit for motor symptoms in PD. Currently, two main structures targeted to treat motor complications in PD are the STN and GPi. Although some groups traditionally favor STN over GPi for tremor suppression, evidence demonstrating superiority in long-term tremor control is limited. METHODS: We performed a systematic review for all randomized trials comparing STN vs GPi DBS in PD that were published before March 2017. Five studies were examined in a random effects model meta-analysis. We conducted moderator variable analysis to determine if there was a treatment effect difference for STN versus GPi. RESULTS: We compared DBS ON versus OFF and found a significant overall standardized difference mean effect: Effect Size = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.316-0.395; P < 0.0001. These findings indicate that DBS reduced tremor symptoms in PD patients with a medium effect size. Moderator variable analysis of STN vs GPI revealed two significant standardized effect sizes: STN effect size = 0.38 and GPi effect size = 0.35. A Z-test showed that effect sizes between the STN and GPi were not significantly different (P = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: DBS is effective in reducing tremor in PD patients regardless of stimulation target. However, the degree of tremor suppression in STN DBS versus GPi DBS was equivalent.
Authors: P R Schuurman; D A Bosch; P M Bossuyt; G J Bonsel; E J van Someren; R M de Bie; M P Merkus; J D Speelman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-02-17 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: Jens Volkmann; Alberto Albanese; Jaime Kulisevsky; Aana-Lena Tornqvist; Jean-Luc Houeto; Bernard Pidoux; Anne-Marie Bonnet; Alexandre Mendes; Alim-Louis Benabid; Valerie Fraix; Nadege Van Blercom; Jing Xie; José Obeso; Maria Cruz Rodriguez-Oroz; Jurge Guridi; Alfons Schnitzler; Lars Timmermann; Alexandre A Gironell; Juan Molet; Benta Pascual-Sedano; Stig Rehncrona; Elena Moro; Anthony C Lang; Andres M Lozano; Anna Rita Bentivoglio; Massimo Scerrati; Maria Fiorella Contarino; Luigi Romito; Marc Janssens; Yves Agid Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Hayriye Cagnan; Simon Little; Thomas Foltynie; Patricia Limousin; Ludvic Zrinzo; Marwan Hariz; Binith Cheeran; James Fitzgerald; Alexander L Green; Tipu Aziz; Peter Brown Journal: Brain Date: 2014-09-08 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Sina R Potel; Sara Marceglia; Sara Meoni; Suneil K Kalia; Rubens G Cury; Elena Moro Journal: Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 6.030
Authors: Maxwell B Wang; Matthew J Boring; Michael J Ward; R Mark Richardson; Avniel Singh Ghuman Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2022-10-08 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Ka Loong Kelvin Au; Joshua K Wong; Takashi Tsuboi; Robert S Eisinger; Kathryn Moore; Janine Lemos Melo Lobo Jofili Lopes; Marshall T Holland; Vanessa M Holanda; Zhongxing Peng-Chen; Addie Patterson; Kelly D Foote; Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora; Michael S Okun; Leonardo Almeida Journal: Neurol Ther Date: 2020-11-02