Kara A Johnson1, Gordon Duffley1, Thomas Foltynie2, Marwan Hariz3, Ludvic Zrinzo2, Eileen M Joyce2, Harith Akram2, Domenico Servello4, Tommaso F Galbiati4, Alberto Bona4, Mauro Porta5, Fan-Gang Meng6, Albert F G Leentjens7, Aysegul Gunduz8, Wei Hu9, Kelly D Foote9, Michael S Okun9, Christopher R Butson10. 1. Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 2. Functional Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom. 3. Functional Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Umea University, Umea, Sweden. 4. Neurosurgical Department, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. 5. Tourette's Syndrome and Movement Disorders Center, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. 6. Beijing Neurosurgical Institute, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. 7. Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 8. Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, Program for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, Departments of Neurology and Neurosurgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; J. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 9. Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, Program for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, Departments of Neurology and Neurosurgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 10. Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Neurology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Psychiatry, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Electronic address: butson@sci.utah.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) targeting the globus pallidus internus (GPi) can improve tics and comorbid obsessive-compulsive behavior (OCB) in patients with treatment-refractory Tourette syndrome (TS). However, some patients' symptoms remain unresponsive, the stimulation applied across patients is variable, and the mechanisms underlying improvement are unclear. Identifying the fiber pathways surrounding the GPi that are associated with improvement could provide mechanistic insight and refine targeting strategies to improve outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected for 35 patients who underwent bilateral GPi DBS for TS. Computational models of fiber tract activation were constructed using patient-specific lead locations and stimulation settings to evaluate the effects of DBS on basal ganglia pathways and the internal capsule. We first evaluated the relationship between activation of individual pathways and symptom improvement. Next, linear mixed-effects models with combinations of pathways and clinical variables were compared in order to identify the best-fit predictive models of tic and OCB improvement. RESULTS: The best-fit model of tic improvement included baseline severity and the associative pallido-subthalamic pathway. The best-fit model of OCB improvement included baseline severity and the sensorimotor pallido-subthalamic pathway, with substantial evidence also supporting the involvement of the prefrontal, motor, and premotor internal capsule pathways. The best-fit models of tic and OCB improvement predicted outcomes across the cohort and in cross-validation. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in fiber pathway activation likely contribute to variable outcomes of DBS for TS. Computational models of pathway activation could be used to develop novel approaches for preoperative targeting and selecting stimulation parameters to improve patient outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) targeting the globus pallidus internus (GPi) can improve tics and comorbid obsessive-compulsive behavior (OCB) in patients with treatment-refractory Tourette syndrome (TS). However, some patients' symptoms remain unresponsive, the stimulation applied across patients is variable, and the mechanisms underlying improvement are unclear. Identifying the fiber pathways surrounding the GPi that are associated with improvement could provide mechanistic insight and refine targeting strategies to improve outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected for 35 patients who underwent bilateral GPi DBS for TS. Computational models of fiber tract activation were constructed using patient-specific lead locations and stimulation settings to evaluate the effects of DBS on basal ganglia pathways and the internal capsule. We first evaluated the relationship between activation of individual pathways and symptom improvement. Next, linear mixed-effects models with combinations of pathways and clinical variables were compared in order to identify the best-fit predictive models of tic and OCB improvement. RESULTS: The best-fit model of tic improvement included baseline severity and the associative pallido-subthalamic pathway. The best-fit model of OCB improvement included baseline severity and the sensorimotor pallido-subthalamic pathway, with substantial evidence also supporting the involvement of the prefrontal, motor, and premotor internal capsule pathways. The best-fit models of tic and OCB improvement predicted outcomes across the cohort and in cross-validation. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in fiber pathway activation likely contribute to variable outcomes of DBS for TS. Computational models of pathway activation could be used to develop novel approaches for preoperative targeting and selecting stimulation parameters to improve patient outcomes.
Authors: Antonio Mantovani; James F Leckman; Heidi Grantz; Robert A King; Alexandra L Sporn; Sarah H Lisanby Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2007-08-20 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Vladimir Fonov; Alan C Evans; Kelly Botteron; C Robert Almli; Robert C McKinstry; D Louis Collins Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2010-07-23 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: E C Miguel; L Baer; B J Coffey; S L Rauch; C R Savage; R L O'Sullivan; K Phillips; C Moretti; J F Leckman; M A Jenike Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Antonio Mantovani; Sarah H Lisanby; Fulvio Pieraccini; Monica Ulivelli; Paolo Castrogiovanni; Simone Rossi Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2005-06-28 Impact factor: 5.176
Authors: Daria Nesterovich Anderson; Gordon Duffley; Johannes Vorwerk; Alan D Dorval; Christopher R Butson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2018-10-02 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Daniel N Bullock; Elena A Hayday; Mark D Grier; Wei Tang; Franco Pestilli; Sarah R Heilbronner Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2022-10-08 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Laura Wehmeyer; Thomas Schüller; Jana Kiess; Petra Heiden; Veerle Visser-Vandewalle; Juan Carlos Baldermann; Pablo Andrade Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 4.086
Authors: Jessica Frey; Jackson Cagle; Kara A Johnson; Joshua K Wong; Justin D Hilliard; Christopher R Butson; Michael S Okun; Coralie de Hemptinne Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-03-09 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Natalia Szejko; Yulia Worbe; Andreas Hartmann; Veerle Visser-Vandewalle; Linda Ackermans; Christos Ganos; Mauro Porta; Albert F G Leentjens; Jan-Hinnerk Mehrkens; Daniel Huys; Juan Carlos Baldermann; Jens Kuhn; Carine Karachi; Cécile Delorme; Thomas Foltynie; Andrea E Cavanna; Danielle Cath; Kirsten Müller-Vahl Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2021-10-04 Impact factor: 4.785