1
|
Merola A, Singh J, Reeves K, Changizi B, Goetz S, Rossi L, Pallavaram S, Carcieri S, Harel N, Shaikhouni A, Sammartino F, Krishna V, Verhagen L, Dalm B. New Frontiers for Deep Brain Stimulation: Directionality, Sensing Technologies, Remote Programming, Robotic Stereotactic Assistance, Asleep Procedures, and Connectomics. Front Neurol 2021; 12:694747. [PMID: 34367055 PMCID: PMC8340024 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.694747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the last few years, while expanding its clinical indications from movement disorders to epilepsy and psychiatry, the field of deep brain stimulation (DBS) has seen significant innovations. Hardware developments have introduced directional leads to stimulate specific brain targets and sensing electrodes to determine optimal settings via feedback from local field potentials. In addition, variable-frequency stimulation and asynchronous high-frequency pulse trains have introduced new programming paradigms to efficiently desynchronize pathological neural circuitry and regulate dysfunctional brain networks not responsive to conventional settings. Overall, these innovations have provided clinicians with more anatomically accurate programming and closed-looped feedback to identify optimal strategies for neuromodulation. Simultaneously, software developments have simplified programming algorithms, introduced platforms for DBS remote management via telemedicine, and tools for estimating the volume of tissue activated within and outside the DBS targets. Finally, the surgical accuracy has improved thanks to intraoperative magnetic resonance or computerized tomography guidance, network-based imaging for DBS planning and targeting, and robotic-assisted surgery for ultra-accurate, millimetric lead placement. These technological and imaging advances have collectively optimized DBS outcomes and allowed “asleep” DBS procedures. Still, the short- and long-term outcomes of different implantable devices, surgical techniques, and asleep vs. awake procedures remain to be clarified. This expert review summarizes and critically discusses these recent innovations and their potential impact on the DBS field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aristide Merola
- Department of Neurology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Jaysingh Singh
- Department of Neurology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Kevin Reeves
- Department of Psychiatry, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Barbara Changizi
- Department of Neurology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Steven Goetz
- Medtronic PLC Neuromodulation, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | | | | | | | - Noam Harel
- Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Ammar Shaikhouni
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Francesco Sammartino
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Vibhor Krishna
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Leo Verhagen
- Movement Disorder Section, Department of Neurological Sciences, Rush University, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Brian Dalm
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| |
Collapse
|