Emmanuel de Schlichting1, Guillaume Coll2,3, Julien Francisco Zaldivar-Jolissaint4, Jérôme Coste2,3, Ana Raquel Marques5,6, Aurélien Mulliez7, Franck Durif5,6, Jean-Jacques Lemaire2,3. 1. Service de Neurochirurgie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble-Alpes (CHUGA), La Tronche, France. EDeSchlichting@chu-grenoble.fr. 2. Service de Neurochirurgie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont Ferrand, Clermont Ferrand, France. 3. IP - Institut Pascal - Clermont Auvergne, Aubière, France. 4. Service de Neurochirurgie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble-Alpes (CHUGA), La Tronche, France. 5. Service de Neurologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont Ferrand, Clermont Ferrand, France. 6. Npsy-Sydo - Neuro-Psycho Pharmacologies des Systèmes Dopaminergique sous-corticaux, Clermont Ferrand, France. 7. Unité de Biostatistiques, Délégation Recherche Clinique et Innovation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont Ferrand, Clermont Ferrand, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Battery life of the most commonly used implantable pulse generators in deep brain stimulation is limited. Device replacement is costly and may expose patients to additional risks. Driven by the observation that in our experience newer generation devices seemed to need earlier replacement than the older generation, we aimed to retrospectively analyze the battery life of two generations of non-rechargeable devices, manufactured by a single company (Medtronic, USA). METHODS: Battery life of 281 devices in 165 patients was taken into account for data analysis. This represented 243 older generation devices (Kinetra and Soletra) and 38 newer generation devices (Activa). RESULTS: The battery life of older generation stimulators was 2-fold longer than the newer generation. CONCLUSIONS: Newer devices are more versatile than the older generation. Their battery life is however significantly shorter. Development of next-generation devices needs to address this issue in order to limit health risks and reduce financial costs.
BACKGROUND: Battery life of the most commonly used implantable pulse generators in deep brain stimulation is limited. Device replacement is costly and may expose patients to additional risks. Driven by the observation that in our experience newer generation devices seemed to need earlier replacement than the older generation, we aimed to retrospectively analyze the battery life of two generations of non-rechargeable devices, manufactured by a single company (Medtronic, USA). METHODS: Battery life of 281 devices in 165 patients was taken into account for data analysis. This represented 243 older generation devices (Kinetra and Soletra) and 38 newer generation devices (Activa). RESULTS: The battery life of older generation stimulators was 2-fold longer than the newer generation. CONCLUSIONS: Newer devices are more versatile than the older generation. Their battery life is however significantly shorter. Development of next-generation devices needs to address this issue in order to limit health risks and reduce financial costs.
Authors: K L Kozielski; A Jahanshahi; H B Gilbert; Y Yu; Ö Erin; D Francisco; F Alosaimi; Y Temel; M Sitti Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 14.136