Pintér D, Járdaházi E, Balás I, Harmat M, Makó T, Juhász A, Janszky J, Kovács N. Antiparkinsonian Drug Reduction After Directional Versus Omnidirectional Bilateral Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation.
Neuromodulation 2023;
26:374-381. [PMID:
35190245 DOI:
10.1016/j.neurom.2022.01.006]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2021] [Revised: 12/15/2021] [Accepted: 01/08/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Several pilot trials and the Clinical Evaluation of the Infinity Deep Brain Stimulation System (PROGRESS) study have found that directional stimulation can provide a wider therapeutic window and lower therapeutic current strength than omnidirectional stimulation.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a single-center, open-label, registry-based, comparative trial to test the hypothesis that directional stimulation can be associated with a greater reduction in the total daily dose of antiparkinsonian medications (ApMeds) than omnidirectional stimulation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A total of 52 patients with directional and 57 subjects with omnidirectional bilateral subthalamic deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) were enrolled. Preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively, the dose of different ApMeds, the number of tablets used daily, the severity of motor and nonmotor symptoms using the Movement Disorder Society-sponsored Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale, and the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) were assessed.
RESULTS
According to the changes in the levodopa equivalent daily dose, directional STN-DBS led to a 13% greater reduction in the total daily dose of ApMed. The 10.3% greater reduction in the dose of levodopa was the main contributor to this difference. The number of different ApMed types also could be decreased in a greater manner with directional stimulation. The improvement in the severity of motor and nonmotor symptoms was comparable; however, we detected a 15.8% greater improvement in the global HRQoL among patients with directional stimulation according to the changes in the summary index of the PDQ-39. The total electrical energy delivered per second was comparable between the groups at 12-month postoperative visit, whereas the amplitude of stimulation was significantly lower and the impedance was significantly higher with directional leads.
CONCLUSIONS
Directional programming can further increase the reduction in the total daily dose of ApMed after STN-DBS. In addition, directional stimulation can have additional beneficial effects on the global HRQoL. The greater reduction of ApMed doses did not require more energy-consuming stimulation with directional stimulation.
Collapse