DBS and electrical neuro-network modulation to treat neurological disorders

Role of Neuromodulation and Optogenetic Manipulation in Pain Treatment

Neuromodulation, including invasive and non-invasive stimulation, has been used to treat intractable chronic pain. However, the mechanisms by which neuromodulation produces antinociceptive effect still remain uncertain. Optogenetic manipulation, a recently developed novel approach, has already proven its value to clinicians by providing new insights into mechanisms of current clinical neuromodulation methods as well as pathophysiology of nervous system diseases at the circuit level. Here, we discuss the principles of two neuromodulation methods (deep brain stimulation and motor cortex stimulation) and their applications in pain treatment. More important, we summarize the new information from recent studies regarding optogenetic manipulation in neuroscience research and its potential utility in pain study.

Brain Stimulation Therapy for Central Post-Stroke Pain from a Perspective of Interhemispheric Neural Network Remodeling

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a debilitating, severe disorder affecting patient quality of life. Since CPSP is refractory to medication, various treatment modalities have been tried with marginal results. Following the first report of epidural motor cortex (M1) stimulation (MCS) for CPSP, many researchers have investigated the mechanisms of electrical stimulation of the M1. CPSP is currently considered to be a maladapted network reorganization problem following stroke, and recent studies have revealed that the activities of the impaired hemisphere after stroke may be inhibited by the contralesional hemisphere. Even though this interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) theory was originally proposed to explain the motor recovery process in stroke patients, we considered that IHI may also contribute to the CPSP mechanism. Based on the IHI theory and the fact that electrical stimulation of the M1 suppresses CPSP, we hypothesized that the inhibitory signals from the contralesional hemisphere may suppress the activities of the M1 in the ipsilesional hemisphere, and therefore pain suppression mechanisms may be malfunctioning in CPSP patients. In this context, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was considered to be a reasonable procedure to address the interhemispheric imbalance, as the bilateral M1 can be simultaneously stimulated using an anode (excitatory) and cathode (inhibitory). In this article, we review the potential mechanisms and propose a new model of CPSP. We also report two cases where CPSP was addressed with tDCS, discuss the potential roles of tDCS in the treatment of CPSP, and make recommendations for future studies.

Surgical site infections after deep brain stimulation surgery: frequency, characteristics and management in a 10-year period

Background/Aims

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) implant infection is a feared complication, as it is difficult to manage and leads to increased patient morbidity. We wanted to assess the frequency and possible risk factors of DBS related infections at our centre. In the purpose of evaluating treatment options, we also analyzed treatment, and the clinical and microbiological characteristics of the infections.

Methods

Electronic medical records of all patients undergoing DBS surgery at our centre, from 2001 through 2010, were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Of the 588 procedures performed 33 (5.6%) led to an infection. Some patients underwent several procedures, thus 32 out of totally 368 patients (8.7%), and 19 out of 285 patients (6.7%) who received primary lead implantation, developed an infection. Most infections (52%) developed within the first month and 79% within three months. In the majority of the infections (79%) hardware removal was performed. Staphylococcus aureus infections were the most frequent (36%), and more likely to have earlier onset, pus formation, a more aggressive development and lead to hardware removal. No risk factors were identified.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that infections with more severe symptoms and growth of staphylococcus aureus should be treated with local hardware removal and antibiotic therapy. In other infections, an initial trial of antibiotic treatment could be considered. New knowledge about the microbiology of DBS related infections may lead to more effective antimicrobial treatment.