Intraoperative Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Deep Brain Stimulation Electrode Planning in Patients with Movement Disorders

Essential Tremor - Deep Brain Stimulation vs. Focused Ultrasound

INTRODUCTION

Essential Tremor (ET) is one of the most common tremor syndromes typically presented as action tremor, affecting mainly the upper limbs. In at least 30-50% of patients, tremor interferes with quality of life, does not respond to first-line therapies and/or intolerable adverse effects may occur. Therefore, surgery may be considered.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors discuss and compare unilateral ventral intermedius nucleus deep brain stimulation (VIM DBS) and bilateral DBS with Magnetic Resonance-guided Focused Ultrasound (MRgFUS) thalamotomy, which comprises focused acoustic energy generating ablation under real-time MRI guidance. Discussion includes their impact on tremor reduction and their potential complications. Finally, the authors provide their expert opinion.

EXPERT OPINION

DBS is adjustable, potentially reversible and allows bilateral treatments; however, it is invasive requires hardware implantation, and has higher surgical risks. Instead, MRgFUS is less invasive, less expensive, and requires no hardware maintenance. Beyond these technical differences, the decision should also involve the patient, family, and caregivers.

Awake Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery Without Intraoperative Imaging Is Accurate and Effective: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery depends on the accuracy of electrode placement. Several factors can affect this such as brain shift, the quality of preoperative planning, and technical factors. It is crucial to determine whether techniques yield accurate lead placement and effective symptom relief. Many of the studies establishing the accuracy of frameless techniques used intraoperative imaging to further refine lead placement.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether awake lead placement without intraoperative imaging can achieve similar minimal targeting error while preserving clinical results.

METHODS

Eighty-two trajectories in 47 patients who underwent awake, frameless DBS lead placement with the Fred Haer Corporation STarFix system for essential tremor or Parkinson's disease were analyzed. Neurological testing during lead placement was used to determine appropriate lead locations, and no intraoperative imaging was performed. Accuracy data were compared with previously performed studies.

RESULTS

The Euclidean error for the patient cohort was 1.79 ± 1.02 mm, and the Pythagorean error was 1.40 ± 0.95 mm. The percentage symptom improvement evaluated by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale for Parkinson's disease or the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin scale for essential tremor was similar to reported values at 58% ± 17.2% and 67.4% ± 24.7%, respectively. The operative time was 95.0 ± 30.3 minutes for all study patients.

CONCLUSION

Awake, frameless DBS surgery with the Fred Haer Corporation STarFix system does not require intraoperative imaging for stereotactic accuracy or clinical effectiveness.

Techniques of Frameless Robot-Assisted Deep Brain Stimulation and Accuracy Compared with the Frame-Based Technique

Background: Frameless robot-assisted deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an innovative technique for leads implantation. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and precision of this technique using the Sinovation SR1 robot. Methods: 35 patients with Parkinson’s disease who accepted conventional frame-based DBS surgery (n = 18) and frameless robot-assisted DBS surgery (n = 17) by the same group of neurosurgeons were analyzed. The coordinate of the tip of the intended trajectory was recorded as x_i, y_i, and z_i. The actual position of lead implantation was recorded as xa, ya, and za. The vector error was calculated by the formula of √(x_i − x_a)² + (y_i − y_a)² + (z_i − z_a)² to evaluate the accuracy. Results: The vector error was 1.52 ± 0.53 mm (range: 0.20–2.39 mm) in the robot-assisted group and was 1.77 ± 0.67 mm (0.59–2.98 mm) in the frame-based group with no significant difference between two groups (p = 0.1301). In 10.7% (n = 3) frameless robot-assisted implanted leads, the vector error was greater than 2.00 mm with a maximum offset of 2.39 mm, and in 35.5% (n = 11) frame-based implanted leads, the vector error was larger than 2.00 mm with a maximum offset of 2.98 mm. Leads were more posterior than planned trajectories in the robot-assisted group and more medial and posterior in the conventional frame-based group. Conclusions: Awake frameless robot-assisted DBS surgery was comparable to the conventional frame-based technique in the accuracy and precision for leads implantation.

MRI magnetic compatible electrical neural interface: From materials to application

Neural electrical interfaces are important tools for local neural stimulation and recording, which potentially have wide application in the diagnosis and treatment of neural diseases, as well as in the transmission of neural activity for brain-computer interface (BCI) systems. At the same time, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is one of the effective and non-invasive techniques for recording whole-brain signals, providing details of brain structures and also activation pattern maps. Simultaneous recording of extracellular neural signals and MRI combines two expressions of the same neural activity and is believed to be of great importance for the understanding of brain function. However, this combination makes requests on the magnetic and electronic performance of neural interface devices. MRI-compatibility refers here to a technological approach to simultaneous MRI and electrode recording or stimulation without artifacts in imaging. Trade-offs between materials magnetic susceptibility selection and electrical function should be considered. Herein, prominent trends in selecting materials of suitable magnetic properties are analyzed and material design, function and application of neural interfaces are outlined together with the remaining challenge to fabricate MRI-compatible neural interface.

[Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus for parkinson's disease: awake vs asleep]

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) is known to be an effective and safe neurosurgical procedure for Parkinson's disease (PD). Traditionally, awake implantation of stimulation system is carried out using microelectrode registration and intraoperative stimulation. Development of neuroimaging technologies enables direct STN imaging. Therefore, asleep surgery without additional intraoperative verification is possible. This approach reduces surgery time and can potentially decrease the incidence of hemorrhagic and infectious complications. The advantages of one method or another are being discussed.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and limitations of various methods for DBS system implantation for bilateral STN stimulation, to study the issues of stereotaxic accuracy, efficiency and safety of asleep and awake electrode implantation into STN.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed the articles published in the PubMed database. Searching algorithm included the following keywords: «asleep DBS», «Parkinson's disease», «subthalamic nucleus», «3T MRI», «SWI», «SWAN».

RESULTS

There were 31 articles devoted to asleep DBS of STN including 4 meta-analyses, 3 prospective controlled studies, 13 retrospective controlled studies and 11 studies without a control group.

CONCLUSION

Asleep implantation of electrodes for DBS of STN can be performed only after a clear imaging of STN boundaries with high-quality MRI.

Intraoperative high-field resonance: How to optimize its use in our healthcare system

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Intraoperative MRI (ioMRI) consists of performing a MRI during brain or spinal surgery. Although it is a safe and useful technique, it is available in a few hospitals. This means some aspects are not perfectly defined or standardized, forcing each center to develop its own solutions. Our goal is to describe the technique, evaluate the changes made to optimize its use and thus be able to facilitate the intraoperative resonance implementation in other neurosurgery departments.

METHODS

A prospective analysis of patients consecutively operated using high-field ioMRI guidance was carried out, describing the type of tumor, clinical data, time and sequences of ioMR, use of intraoperative neurophysiology, preoperative tumor volume, after ioMR, and postoperative, as well as complications.

RESULTS

ioMR was performed in 38 patients selected from among 425 brain tumors (9%) operated on in this interval. The tumor types were: 11 glioblastomas, 8 anaplastic astrocytomas, 5 diffuse astrocytomas, 4 meningiomas, 3 oligodendrogliomas, 2 metastases, 2 epidermoid cysts, 1 astroblastoma, 1 arachnoid cyst and 1 pituitary adenoma. The mean age was 45 years. The mean preoperative tumor volume was 45.22cc, after the ioMR 5.08cc and postoperative 1.28cc. Resection was extended after ioMR in 76%. Gross total resection was achieved in 15 patients and residual tumor of less than 1cc was observed in 8. An intentional tumor tissue was left in an eloquent brain region (mean volume 7cc) in 13 patients. Bleeding and ischemia complications were detected early on ioMR in 5%. MRI length was 47 min on average.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative MRI was a useful and safe technique, and no associated complications were registered.

Robot-Assisted Stereotaxy Reduces Target Error: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of 6056 Trajectories

BACKGROUND

The pursuit of improved accuracy for localization and electrode implantation in deep brain stimulation (DBS) and stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) has fostered an abundance of disparate surgical/stereotactic practices. Specific practices/technologies directly modify implantation accuracy; however, no study has described their respective influence in multivariable context.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the known literature to statistically quantify factors affecting implantation accuracy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the inverse-variance weighted pooled mean target error (MTE) of implanted electrodes among patients undergoing DBS or sEEG. MTE was defined as Euclidean distance between planned and final electrode tip. Meta-regression identified moderators of MTE in a multivariable-adjusted model.

RESULTS

A total of 37 eligible studies were identified from a search return of 2,901 potential articles (2002-2018) - 27 DBS and 10 sEEG. Random-effects pooled MTE = 1.91 mm (95% CI: 1.7-2.1) for DBS and 2.34 mm (95% CI: 2.1-2.6) for sEEG. Meta-regression identified study year, robot use, frame/frameless technique, and intraoperative electrophysiologic testing (iEPT) as significant multivariable-adjusted moderators of MTE (P < .0001, R2 = 0.63). Study year was associated with a 0.92-mm MTE reduction over the 16-yr study period (P = .0035), and robot use with a 0.79-mm decrease (P = .0019). Frameless technique was associated with a mean 0.50-mm (95% CI: 0.17-0.84) increase, and iEPT use with a 0.45-mm (95% CI: 0.10-0.80) increase in MTE. Registration method, imaging type, intraoperative imaging, target, and demographics were not significantly associated with MTE on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Robot assistance for stereotactic electrode implantation is independently associated with improved accuracy and reduced target error. This remains true regardless of other procedural factors, including frame-based vs frameless technique.

O-Arm Stereotactic Imaging in Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery Workflow: A Utility and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery is an established treatment for movement disorders. Advances in neuroimaging techniques have resulted in improved targeting accuracy that may improve clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of using the Medtronic O-arm device for the acquisition of intraoperative stereotactic imaging, targeting, and localization of DBS electrodes compared with standard stereotactic MRI or computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

Patients were recruited prospectively into the study. Routine frame-based stereotactic DBS surgery was performed. Intraoperative imaging was used to facilitate and verify the accurate placement of the intracranial electrodes. The acquisition of coordinates and verification of the position of the electrodes using the O-arm were evaluated and compared with conventional stereotactic MRI or CT. Additionally, a systematic review of the literature on the use of intraoperative imaging in DBS surgery was performed.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were included. The indications for DBS surgery were dystonia, Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, and epilepsy. The globus pallidus internus was the most commonly targeted region (43.7%), followed by the subthalamic nucleus (35%). Stereotactic O-arm imaging reduced the overall surgical time by 68 min, reduced the length of time of acquisition of stereotactic images by 77%, reduced patient exposure to ionizing radiation by 24.2%, significantly reduced operating room (OR) costs per procedure by 31%, and increased the OR and neuroradiology suite availability.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the O-arm in DBS surgery workflow significantly reduced the duration of image acquisition, the exposure to ionizing radiation, and costs when compared with standard stereotactic MRI or CT, without reducing accuracy.

A Review on Advances in Intra-operative Imaging for Surgery and Therapy: Imagining the Operating Room of the Future

With the advent of Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS), intra-operative imaging has become crucial for surgery and therapy guidance, allowing to partially compensate for the lack of information typical of MIS. This paper reviews the advancements in both classical (i.e. ultrasounds, X-ray, optical coherence tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) and more recent (i.e. multispectral, photoacoustic and Raman imaging) intra-operative imaging modalities. Each imaging modality was analyzed, focusing on benefits and disadvantages in terms of compatibility with the operating room, costs, acquisition time and image characteristics. Tables are included to summarize this information. New generation of hybrid surgical room and algorithms for real time/in room image processing were also investigated. Each imaging modality has its own (site- and procedure-specific) peculiarities in terms of spatial and temporal resolution, field of view and contrasted tissues. Besides the benefits that each technique offers for guidance, considerations about operators and patient risk, costs, and extra time required for surgical procedures have to be considered. The current trend is to equip surgical rooms with multimodal imaging systems, so as to integrate multiple information for real-time data extraction and computer-assisted processing. The future of surgery is to enhance surgeons eye to minimize intra- and after-surgery adverse events and provide surgeons with all possible support to objectify and optimize the care-delivery process.

Role of deep brain stimulation therapy in the magnetic resonance-guided high-frequency focused ultrasound era: current situation and future prospects

Introduction: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established treatment of movement disorders; but recently there has been an increasing trend toward the ablative procedure magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFU). DBS is an efficient neuromodulatory technique but associated with surgical complications. MRIgFUS is an incision-free method that allows thermal lesioning, with fewer surgical complications but irreversible effects.Areas covered: We look at current and prospective aspects of both techniques. In DBS, appropriate patient selection, improvement in surgical expertise, target accuracy (preoperative and intraoperative imaging), neurophysiological recordings, and novel segmented leads need to be considered. However, increased number of older patients with higher comorbidities and risk of DBS complications (mainly intracranial hemorrhage, but also infections, hardware complications) make them not eligible for surgery. With MRgFUS, hemorrhage risks are virtually nonexistent, infection or hardware malfunction are eliminated, while irreversible side effects can appear.Expert commentary: Comparison of the efficacy and risks associated with these techniques, in combination with a growing aged population in developed countries with higher comorbidities and a preference for less invasive treatments, necessitates a review of the indications for movement disorders and the most appropriate treatment modalities.

Is awake physiological confirmation necessary for DBS treatment of Parkinson's disease today? A comparison of intraoperative imaging, physiology, and physiology imaging-guided DBS in the past decade

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established surgical therapy for Parkinson's disease (PD). Intraoperative imaging (IMG), intraoperative physiology (PHY) and their combination (COMB) are the three mainstream DBS guidance methods.

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively compare the use of IMG-DBS, PHY-DBS and COMB-DBS in treating PD.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and OpenGrey were searched to identify PD-DBS studies reporting guidance techniques published between January 1, 2010, and May 1, 2018. We quantitatively compared the therapeutic effects, surgical time, target error and complication risk and qualitatively compared the patient experience, cost and technical prospects. A meta-regression analysis was also performed. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018105995.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine cohorts were included in the main analysis. The three groups were equivalent in therapeutic effects and infection risks. IMG-DBS (p < 0.001) and COMB-DBS (p < 0.001) had a smaller target error than PHY-DBS. IMG-DBS had a shorter surgical time (p < 0.001 and p = 0.008, respectively) and a lower intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) risk (p = 0.013 and p = 0.004, respectively) than PHY- and COMB-DBS. The use of intraoperative imaging and microelectrode recording correlated with a higher surgical accuracy (p = 0.018) and a higher risk of ICH (p = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

The comparison of COMB-DBS and PHY-DBS showed intraoperative imaging's superiority (higher surgical accuracy), while the comparison of COMB-DBS and IMG-DBS showed physiological confirmation's inferiority (longer surgical time and higher ICH risk). Combined with previous evidence, the use of intraoperative neuroimaging techniques should become a future trend.