Chronic bilateral pallidal stimulation in patients with generalized primary dystonia - multi-contact cathodal stimulation is superior to bipolar stimulation mode. Preliminary results

Clinical deep brain stimulation strategies for orientation-selective pathway activation

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated stimulation strategies to increase the selectivity of activating axonal pathways within the brain based on their orientations relative to clinical deep brain stimulation (DBS) lead implants.

APPROACH

Previous work has shown how varying electrode shape and controlling the primary electric field direction through preclinical electrode arrays can produce orientation-selective axonal stimulation. Here, we significantly extend those results using computational models to evaluate the degree to which clinical DBS leads can direct stimulus-induced electric fields and generate orientation-selective activation of fiber pathways in the brain. Orientation-selective pulse paradigms were evaluated in conceptual models and in patient-specific models of subthalamic nucleus (STN)-DBS for treating Parkinson's disease.

MAIN RESULTS

Single-contact monopolar or two-contact bipolar stimulation through clinical DBS leads with cylindrical electrodes primarily activated axons orientated parallel to the lead. Conversely, multi-contact monopolar stimulation with a cathode-leading pulse waveform selectively activated axons perpendicular to the DBS lead. Clinical DBS leads with segmented rows of electrodes and a single current source provided additional angular resolution for activating axons oriented 0°, ±22.5°, ±45°, ±67.5°, or 90° relative to the lead shaft. Employing multiple independent current sources to deliver unequal amounts of current through these leads further increased the angular resolution of activation relative to the lead shaft. The patient-specific models indicated that multi-contact cathode configurations, which are rarely used in clinical practice, could increase activation of the hyperdirect pathway collaterals projecting into STN (a putative therapeutic target), while minimizing direct activation of the corticospinal tract of internal capsule, which can elicit sensorimotor side-effects when stimulated.

SIGNIFICANCE

When combined with patient-specific tissue anisotropy and patient-specific anatomical morphologies of neural pathways responsible for therapy and side effects, orientation-selective DBS approaches show potential to significantly improve clinical outcomes of DBS therapy for a range of existing and investigational clinical indications.

Dystonia rating scales: critique and recommendations

Many rating scales have been applied to the evaluation of dystonia, but only few have been assessed for clinimetric properties. The Movement Disorders Society commissioned this task force to critique existing dystonia rating scales and place them in the clinical and clinimetric context. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify rating scales that have either been validated or used in dystonia. Thirty-six potential scales were identified. Eight were excluded because they did not meet review criteria, leaving 28 scales that were critiqued and rated by the task force. Seven scales were found to meet criteria to be "recommended": the Blepharospasm Disability Index is recommended for rating blepharospasm; the Cervical Dystonia Impact Scale and the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale for rating cervical dystonia; the Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire for blepharospasm and cervical dystonia; the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and the Vocal Performance Questionnaire (VPQ) for laryngeal dystonia; and the Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale for rating generalized dystonia. Two "recommended" scales (VHI and VPQ) are generic scales validated on few patients with laryngeal dystonia, whereas the others are disease-specific scales. Twelve scales met criteria for "suggested" and 7 scales met criteria for "listed." All the scales are individually reviewed in the online information. The task force recommends 5 specific dystonia scales and suggests to further validate 2 recommended generic voice-disorder scales in dystonia. Existing scales for oromandibular, arm, and task-specific dystonia should be refined and fully assessed. Scales should be developed for body regions for which no scales are available, such as lower limbs and trunk.