Psychosurgery: avoiding an ethical redux while advancing a therapeutic future

Thirty Years of Global Deep Brain Stimulation: "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"?

BACKGROUND

The advent of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) for Parkinson's disease 30 years ago has ushered a global breakthrough of DBS as a universal method for therapy and research in wide areas of neurology and psychiatry. The literature of the last three decades has described numerous concepts and practices of DBS, often branded as novelties or discoveries. However, reading the contemporary publications often elicits a sense of déjà vu in relation to several methods, attributes, and practices of DBS. Here, we review various applications and techniques of the modern-era DBS and compare them with practices of the past.

SUMMARY

Compared with modern literature, publications of the old-era functional stereotactic neurosurgery, including old-era DBS, show that from the very beginning multidisciplinarity and teamwork were often prevalent and insisted upon, ethical concerns were recognized, brain circuitries and rational for brain targets were discussed, surgical indications were similar, closed-loop stimulation was attempted, evaluations of surgical results were debated, and controversies were common. Thus, it appears that virtually everything done today in the field of DBS bears resemblance to old-time practices, or has been done before, albeit with partly other tools and techniques. Movement disorders remain the main indications for modern DBS as was the case for lesional surgery and old-era DBS. The novelties today consist of the STN as the dominant target for DBS, the tremendous advances in computerized brain imaging, the sophistication and versatility of implantable DBS hardware, and the large potential for research.

KEY MESSAGES

Many aspects of contemporary DBS bear strong resemblance to practices of the past. The dominant clinical indications remain movement disorders with virtually the same brain targets as in the past, with one exception: the STN. Other novel brain targets - that are so far subject to DBS trials - are the pedunculopontine nucleus for gait freezing, the anteromedial internal pallidum for Gilles de la Tourette and the fornix for Alzheimer's disease. The major innovations and novelties compared to the past concern mainly the unmatched level of research activity, its high degree of sponsorship, and the outstanding advances in technology that have enabled multimodal brain imaging and the miniaturization, versatility, and sophistication of implantable hardware. The greatest benefit for patients today, compared to the past, is the higher level of precision and safety of DBS, and of all functional stereotactic neurosurgery.

Conflicts of interest and industry professional relationships in psychiatric neurosurgery: a comparative literature review

OBJECTIVE The research required to establish that psychiatric treatments are effective often depends on collaboration between academic clinical researchers and industry. Some of the goals of clinical practice and those of commercial developers of psychiatric therapies overlap, such as developing safe and effective treatments. However, there might also be incompatible goals; physicians aim to provide the best care they can to their patients, whereas the medical industry ultimately aims to develop therapies that are commercially successful. In some cases, however, clinical research may be aiming both at improved patient care and commercial success. It is in these cases that a conflict of interest (COI) arises. The goal of this study was to identify differences and commonalities regarding COIs between 2 kinds of somatic psychiatric interventions: pharmacological and neurosurgical. METHODS The authors conducted a study focused on professional concerns regarding pharmacological and neurosurgical psychiatric interventions. They used medical and bioethics journal articles as an indicator of professionals' concerns and carried out a thematic content analysis of peer-reviewed articles published between 1960 and 2015, using PubMed and Google Scholar. RESULTS One hundred thirty-seven relevant articles were identified, of which 86 papers focused primarily on psychopharmacology and 51 on neurosurgery. The intervention most discussed in the psychiatric neurosurgery data set was deep brain stimulation (n = 42). While there were no significant differences at the level of categories, pharmacological and neurosurgical interventions differ in the underlying themes discussed. Two issues widely discussed in the articles on pharmaceutical interventions, but largely neglected in the neurosurgery articles, were medical professional issues and industry involvement. CONCLUSIONS COIs are a neglected issue in the discussion of ethics concerns regarding medical devices in psychiatry. Yet as these interventions become more common, it is important to address them in part through learning from the discussion regarding COIs in the pharmaceutical industry and by developing approaches to address those aspects of COIs that are unique to the medical device industry.

Comparison of philosophical concerns between professionals and the public regarding two psychiatric treatments

BACKGROUND

Psychiatric interventions are a contested area in medicine, not only because of their history of abuses, but also because their therapeutic goal is to affect emotions, thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors that are regarded as pathological. Because psychiatric interventions affect characteristics that seem central to who we are, they raise issues regarding identity, autonomy, and personal responsibility for one's own well-being. Our study addresses two questions: (1) Do the public and academic researchers understand the philosophical stakes of these technologies in the same way? Following from this, (2) to what extent does the specific type of psychiatric technology affect the issues these two groups raise? This study compares how ethical issues regarding neurosurgical and pharmaceutical psychiatric interventions are discussed among the public and in the professional community of academic medicine and bioethics.

METHODS

We analyzed (1) online public comments and (2) the medical and bioethics literature, comparing the discussions of pharmacological and neurosurgical interventions in psychiatry in each source.

RESULTS

Overall, the public discussed philosophical issues less frequently than academics. For the two types of psychiatric interventions, we found differences between the academic literature and public comments among all themes, except for personal responsibility.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings reveal some of the similarities and discrepancies in how philosophical issues associated with psychiatric treatments are discussed in professional circles and among the public. Further research into what causes these discrepancies is crucial.

Deep Brain Stimulation as Clinical Innovation: An Ethical and Organizational Framework to Sustain Deliberations About Psychiatric Deep Brain Stimulation

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) for psychiatric disorders needs to be investigated in proper research trials. However, there are rare circumstances in which DBS could be offered to psychiatric patients as a form of surgical innovation, therefore potentially blurring the lines between these research trials and health care. In this article, we discuss the conditions under which surgical innovation may be accepted as a practice falling at the frontiers of standard clinical care and research per se. However, recognizing this distinction does not settle all ethical issues. Our article offers ethical guideposts to allow clinicians, surgical teams, institutions, and institutional review boards to deliberate about some of the fundamental issues that should be considered before surgical innovation with psychiatric DBS is undertaken. We provide key guiding questions to sustain this deliberation. Then we review the normative and empirical literature that exists to guide reflection about the ethics of surgical innovation and psychiatric DBS with respect to general ethical questions pertinent to psychiatric DBS, multidisciplinary team perspectives in psychiatric DBS, mechanisms for oversight in psychiatric DBS, and capacity and consent in psychiatric DBS. The considerations presented here are to recognize the very specific nature of surgical innovation and to ensure that surgical innovation in the context of psychiatric DBS remains a limited, special category of activity that does not replace appropriate surgical research or become the standard of care based on limited evidence.

ABBREVIATIONS

DBS, deep brain stimulationIRB, institutional review boardOCD, obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The Surgical Elimination of Violence? Conflicting Attitudes towards Technology and Science during the Psychosurgery Controversy of the 1970s

In the 1970s a public controversy erupted over the proposed use of brain operations to curtail violent behavior. Civil libertarians, civil rights and community activists, leaders of the anti-psychiatry movement, and some U.S. Congressmen charged psychosurgeons and the National Institute of Mental Health, with furthering a political project: the suppression of dissent. Several government-sponsored investigations into psychosurgery rebutted this charge and led to an official qualified endorsement of the practice while calling attention to the need for more "scientific" understanding and better ethical safeguards. This paper argues that the psychosurgery debate of the 1970s was more than a power struggle between members of the public and the psychiatric establishment. The debate represented a clash between a postmodern skepticism about science and renewed focus on ultimate ends, on the one hand, and a modern faith in standards and procedures, a preoccupation with means, on the other. These diverging commitments made the dispute ultimately irresolvable.

Tourette syndrome deep brain stimulation: a review and updated recommendations

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) may improve disabling tics in severely affected medication and behaviorally resistant Tourette syndrome (TS). Here we review all reported cases of TS DBS and provide updated recommendations for selection, assessment, and management of potential TS DBS cases based on the literature and implantation experience. Candidates should have a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM V) diagnosis of TS with severe motor and vocal tics, which despite exhaustive medical and behavioral treatment trials result in significant impairment. Deep brain stimulation should be offered to patients only by experienced DBS centers after evaluation by a multidisciplinary team. Rigorous preoperative and postoperative outcome measures of tics and associated comorbidities should be used. Tics and comorbid neuropsychiatric conditions should be optimally treated per current expert standards, and tics should be the major cause of disability. Psychogenic tics, embellishment, and malingering should be recognized and addressed. We have removed the previously suggested 25-year-old age limit, with the specification that a multidisciplinary team approach for screening is employed. A local ethics committee or institutional review board should be consulted for consideration of cases involving persons younger than 18 years of age, as well as in cases with urgent indications. Tourette syndrome patients represent a unique and complex population, and studies reveal a higher risk for post-DBS complications. Successes and failures have been reported for multiple brain targets; however, the optimal surgical approach remains unknown. Tourette syndrome DBS, though still evolving, is a promising approach for a subset of medication refractory and severely affected patients.

Consensus on guidelines for stereotactic neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders

BACKGROUND

For patients with psychiatric illnesses remaining refractory to 'standard' therapies, neurosurgical procedures may be considered. Guidelines for safe and ethical conduct of such procedures have previously and independently been proposed by various local and regional expert groups.

METHODS

To expand on these earlier documents, representative members of continental and international psychiatric and neurosurgical societies, joined efforts to further elaborate and adopt a pragmatic worldwide set of guidelines. These are intended to address a broad range of neuropsychiatric disorders, brain targets and neurosurgical techniques, taking into account cultural and social heterogeneities of healthcare environments.

FINDINGS

The proposed consensus document highlights that, while stereotactic ablative procedures such as cingulotomy and capsulotomy for depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder are considered 'established' in some countries, they still lack level I evidence. Further, it is noted that deep brain stimulation in any brain target hitherto tried, and for any psychiatric or behavioural disorder, still remains at an investigational stage. Researchers are encouraged to design randomised controlled trials, based on scientific and data-driven rationales for disease and brain target selection. Experienced multidisciplinary teams are a mandatory requirement for the safe and ethical conduct of any psychiatric neurosurgery, ensuring documented refractoriness of patients, proper consent procedures that respect patient's capacity and autonomy, multifaceted preoperative as well as postoperative long-term follow-up evaluation, and reporting of effects and side effects for all patients.

INTERPRETATION

This consensus document on ethical and scientific conduct of psychiatric surgery worldwide is designed to enhance patient safety.

Interventional psychiatry: why now?

Interventional psychiatry offers substantial therapeutic benefits in some neuropsychiatric disorders and enormous potential in treating others. However, as interventional diagnostics and therapeutics require specialized knowledge and skill foreign to many psychiatrists, the emerging subspecialty of interventional psychiatry must be more formally integrated into the continuum of psychiatric training to ensure both safe application and continued growth. By establishing training paradigms for interventional psychiatry, academic medical centers can help fill this knowledge gap. The cultivation of a properly trained cohort of interventional psychiatrists will better meet the challenges of treatment-resistant psychiatric illness through safe and ethical practice, while facilitating a more informed development and integration of novel neuromodulation techniques.

Beyond Consent in Research

Neuroethics Now welcomes papers addressing the ethical application of neuroscience in research and patient care, as well as its impact on society.

Interventional psychiatry: how should psychiatric educators incorporate neuromodulation into training?

OBJECTIVE

Interventional psychiatry is an emerging subspecialty that uses a variety of procedural neuromodulation techniques in the context of an electrocircuit-based view of mental dysfunction as proximal causes for psychiatric diseases.

METHODS

The authors propose the development of an interventional psychiatry-training paradigm analogous to those found in cardiology and neurology.

RESULTS

The proposed comprehensive training in interventional psychiatry would include didactics in the theory, proposed mechanisms, and delivery of invasive and noninvasive brain stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

The development and refinement of this subspecialty would facilitate safe, effective growth in the field of brain stimulation by certified and credentialed practitioners within the field of psychiatry while also potentially improving the efficacy of current treatments.

Wilder Penfield - bioethicist

Bioethics is a new discipline which developed as modern medical and scientific breakthroughs surpassed the ability of traditional medical ethics to contend with unique ethical dilemmas. It evolved into an interdisciplinary discourse regarding the ethical and societal implications of medicine and the biomedical sciences. Wilder Penfield (1891-1976), celebrated neurosurgeon and neuroscientist, is rarely thought of as a "bioethicist," and his mention in texts on the history of bioethics is little more than a footnote. However, he appears to have contributed to the field of bioethics in a number of ways: through his solutions to the ethical problems posed by the unique form of surgery he developed; through his recognition of the limitations of traditional medical ethics; through his involvement of the public and other disciplines in ethical discussions; and through the impact that his work still has today in the area of bioethics termed "neuroethics."

Ethical Considerations in Deep Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Addiction and Overeating Associated With Obesity

The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for movement disorders and the improved understanding of the neurobiologic and neuroanatomic bases of psychiatric diseases have led to proposals to expand current DBS applications. Recent preclinical and clinical work with Alzheimer's disease and obsessive-compulsive disorder, for example, supports the safety of stimulating regions in the hypothalamus and nucleus accumbens in humans. These regions are known to be involved in addiction and overeating associated with obesity. However, the use of DBS targeting these areas as a treatment modality raises common ethical considerations, which include informed consent, coercion, enhancement, threat to personhood, and manipulation of the reward center. Pilot studies for both of these conditions are currently investigational. If these studies show promise, then there is a need to address the ethical concerns related to the initiation of clinical trials including the reliability of preclinical evidence, patient selection, study design, compensation for participation and injury, cost-effectiveness, and the need for long-term follow-up. Multidisciplinary teams are necessary for the ethical execution of such studies. In addition to establishing safety and efficacy, the consideration of these ethical issues is vital to the adoption of DBS as a treatment for these conditions. We offer suggestions about the pursuit of future clinical trials of DBS for the treatment of addiction and overeating associated with obesity and provide a framework for addressing ethical concerns related to treatment.

Therapeutic stimulation versus ablation

The renaissance of functional stereotactic neurosurgery was pioneered in the mid 1980s by Laitinen's introduction of Leksell's posteroventral pallidotomy for Parkinson´s disease (PD). This ablative procedure experienced a worldwide spread in the 1990s, owing to its excellent effect on dyskinesias and other symptoms of post-l-dopa PD. Modern deep brain stimulation (DBS), pioneered by Benabid and Pollak in 1987 for the treatment of tremor, first became popular when it was applied to the subthalamic nucleus (STN) in the mid 1990s, where it demonstrated a striking effect on all cardinal symptoms of advanced PD, and permitted reduced dosages of medication. DBS, as a nondestructive, adaptable, and reversible procedure that is proving safe in bilateral surgery on basal ganglia, has great appeal to clinicians and patients alike, despite the fact that it is expensive, laborious, and relies on very strict patient selection criteria, especially for STN DBS. Psychiatric surgery has experienced the same phenomenon, with DBS supplanting completely stereotactic ablative procedures. This chapter discusses the pros and cons of ablation versus stimulation and investigates the reasons why DBS has overshadowed proven efficient ablative procedures such as pallidotomy for PD, and capsulotomy and cingulotomy for obsessive-compulsive disorder and depression.

Challenges to deep brain stimulation: a pragmatic response to ethical, fiscal, and regulatory concerns

In response to the early success of deep brain stimulation, we offer some common-sense strategies to sustain the work, addressing the need to do so in a fiscally workable, ethically transparent, and scientifically informed manner. After delineating major threats, we will suggest reforms in both the legislative and regulatory spheres that might remediate these challenges. We will recommend (1) revisions to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, which governs intellectual property exchange resulting from federally funded research; (2) revisions to the Association of American Medical Colleges recommendations concerning the management of conflicts of interest when scientists with an intellectual property interest participate in clinical research in tandem; (3) revisions to the Food and Drug Administration's pre-market approval process for new devices, including a proposal for a mini-investigational device exemption; and (4) the establishment of a public-private partnership to build ethical and sustainable synergies between the scientific community, industry, and government that would foster discovery and innovation.

Twenty-five years of deep brain stimulation: celebrations and apprehensions

The year 2012 marks the 25th anniversary of the birth of modern deep brain stimulation (DBS), which was introduced by Benabid et al in 1987, initially to treat tremor with DBS of the ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus. The subsequent extension of DBS to the subthalamic nucleus (STN), demonstrating its efficacy on virtually all symptoms of advanced Parkinson's disease (PD), sparked an era of intense clinical and research activities, eventually transcending PD and movement disorders to encompass mood and mind. Investigations of the role of DBS in a variety of neurological, psychiatric, cognitive, and behavioral conditions is ongoing. Serendipitous discoveries and advances in functional imaging are providing "new" brain targets for an increasing number of pathologies. Toward the end of this quarter of a century of DBS, there have been some indications that the field may be at risk of gliding down a slippery slope, reminiscent of the excesses of the old-era DBS. Although there are many reasons this year to celebrate the achievements of 25 years of modern DBS, there are also reasons to fear the opening of a new Pandora's box.

Surgery of the mind, mood, and conscious state: an idea in evolution

Since the beginning of recorded history, humans have sought a physical means of altering disordered behavior and consciousness. This quest has spawned numerous innovations in neurosurgery and the neurosciences, from the earliest prehistoric attempts at trepanation to the electrocortical and anatomic localization of cerebral function that emerged in the 19th century. At the start of the 20th century, the overwhelming social impact of psychiatric illness intersected with the novel but imperfect understanding of frontal lobe function, establishing a decades-long venture into the modern origin of psychosurgery, the prefrontal lobotomy. The subsequent social and ethical ramifications of the widespread overuse of transorbital lobotomies drove psychosurgery to near extinction. However, as the pharmacologic treatment of psychiatric illness was established, numerous concomitant technical and neuroscientific innovations permitted the incremental development of a new paradigm of treating the disordered mind. In this article, we retrospectively examine these early origins of psychosurgery and then look to the recent past, present, and future for emerging trends in surgery of the psyche. Recent decades have seen a revolution in minimalism, noninvasive imaging, and functional manipulation of the human cerebrum that have created new opportunities and treatment modalities for disorders of the human mind and mood. Early contemporary efforts were directed at focal lesioning of abnormal pathways, but deep-brain stimulation now aims to reversibly alter and modulate those neurologic activities responsible for not only psychiatric disorders, but also to modulate and even to augment consciousness, memory, and other elements of cerebral function. As new tools become available, the social and medical impact of psychosurgery promises to revolutionize not only neurosurgery, but also humans' capability for positively impacting life and society.

Beyond Mere Symptom Relief in Deep Brain Stimulation: An Ethical Obligation for Multi-faceted Assessment of Outcome

Assessment of outcome following Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) has traditionally focused on symptom specific and quality of life measures. Greater attention needs to be paid to the diversity of patient goals and values, as well as recognition of the shifting nature of those goals over the course of DBS therapy. We report preliminary data from an empirical study examining patients' goals with respect to DBS in the treatment of Parkinson disease. We argue that a multifaceted assessment of outcome over time, including well validated symptom measures, quality of life, functional and patient specific metrics, is ethically necessary in order to fulfill fiduciary and professional responsibilities. These assessments should be augmented with a deliberative multi-disciplinary process of review and evaluation. Such an approach will lead to improved inform consent, promote better clinical research, and facilitate good patient care by providing a systematic mechanism for capturing and acting on important patient insights. These processes become increasingly critical as DBS begins to be applied to neuropsychiatric disorders.

Misuse of the FDA's humanitarian device exemption in deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder

Deep brain stimulation-a novel surgical procedure-is emerging as a treatment of last resort for people diagnosed with neuropsychiatric disorders such as severe obsessive-compulsive disorder. The US Food and Drug Administration granted a so-called humanitarian device exemption to allow patients to access this intervention, thereby removing the requirement for a clinical trial of the appropriate size and statistical power. Bypassing the rigors of such trials puts patients at risk, limits opportunities for scientific discovery, and gives device manufacturers unique marketing opportunities. We argue that Congress and federal regulators should revisit the humanitarian device exemption to ensure that it is not used to sidestep careful research that can offer valuable data with appropriate patient safeguards.

Ethical guidance for the management of conflicts of interest for researchers, engineers and clinicians engaged in the development of therapeutic deep brain stimulation

The clinical promise of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for neuropsychiatric conditions is coupled with the potential for ethical conflicts of interest because the work is so heavily reliant upon collaborations between academia, industry and the clinic. To foster transparency and public trust, we offer ethical guidance for the management of conflicts of interest in the conduct of DBS research and practice so that this nascent field can better balance competing goods and engineer new and better strategies for the amelioration of human suffering. We also hope that our ethical analysis will be of relevance to those working with other related neuroprosthetic devices, such brain-computer interfaces and neural arrays, which naturally share many of the same concerns.

Surgical resection of hypothalamic hamartomas for severe behavioral symptoms

Hypothalamic hamartomas (HHs) are associated with treatment-resistant epilepsy. Many patients also experience severe and sometimes disabling psychiatric problems. The most common behavioral symptoms consist of paroxysms of uncontrolled anger related to poor frustration tolerance. These can include violence, resulting in disrupted family or school relationships, and legal consequences including incarceration. In a large cohort of patients undergoing surgical resection of HHs for refractory epilepsy, 88% of families described an improvement in overall behavioral functioning [1]. Here, we describe four patients (three males, mean age=11.9 years) who underwent surgical resection of HHs largely for behavioral indications. Three patients had relatively well controlled seizures, and one had no history of epilepsy. All patients had striking improvement in their psychiatric comorbidity. HH resection can result in significant improvement in behavioral functioning, even in patients with relatively infrequent seizures. Further investigation under approved human research protocols is warranted.

Deep brain stimulation between 1947 and 1987: the untold story

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is the most rapidly expanding field in neurosurgery. Movement disorders are well-established indications for DBS, and a number of other neurological and psychiatric indications are currently being investigated. Numerous contemporary opinions, reviews, and viewpoints on DBS fail to provide a comprehensive account of how this method came into being. Misconceptions in the narrative history of DBS conveyed by the wealth of literature published over the last 2 decades can be summarized as follows: Deep brain stimulation was invented in 1987. The utility of high-frequency stimulation was also discovered in 1987. Lesional surgery preceded DBS. Deep brain stimulation was first used in the treatment of movement disorders and was subsequently used in the treatment of psychiatric and behavioral disorders. Reports of nonmotor effects of subthalamic nucleus DBS prompted its use in psychiatric illness. Early surgical interventions for psychiatric illness failed to adopt a multidisciplinary approach; neurosurgeons often worked "in isolation" from other medical specialists. The involvement of neuro-ethicists and multidisciplinary teams are novel standards introduced in the modern practice of DBS for mental illness that are essential in avoiding the unethical behavior of bygone eras. In this paper, the authors examined each of these messages in the light of literature published since 1947 and formed the following conclusions. Chronic stimulation of subcortical structures was first used in the early 1950s, very soon after the introduction of human stereotaxy. Studies and debate on the stimulation frequency most likely to achieve desirable results and avoid side effects date back to the early days of DBS; several authors advocated the use of "high" frequency, although the exact frequency was not always specified. Ablative surgery and electrical stimulation developed in parallel, practically since the introduction of human stereotactic surgery. The first applications of both ablative surgery and chronic subcortical stimulation were in psychiatry, not in movement disorders. The renaissance of DBS in surgical treatment of psychiatric illness in 1999 had little to do with nonmotor effects of subthalamic nucleus DBS but involved high-frequency stimulation of the very same brain targets previously used in ablative surgery. Pioneers in functional neurosurgery mostly worked in multidisciplinary groups, including when treating psychiatric illness; those "acting in isolation" were not neurosurgeons. Ethical concerns have indeed been addressed in the past, by neurosurgeons and others. Some of the questionable behavior in surgery for psychiatric illness, including the bygone era of DBS, was at the hands of nonneurosurgeons. These practices have been deemed as "dubious and precarious by yesterday's standards."

Invasive circuitry-based neurotherapeutics: stereotactic ablation and deep brain stimulation for OCD

Psychiatric neurosurgery, specifically stereotactic ablation, has continued since the 1940s, mainly at a few centers in Europe and the US. Since the late 1990s, the resurgence of interest in this field has been remarkable; reports of both lesion procedures and the newer technique of deep brain stimulation (DBS) have increased rapidly. In early 2009, the US FDA granted limited humanitarian approval for DBS for otherwise intractable obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), the first such approval for a psychiatric illness. Several factors explain the emergence of DBS and continued small-scale use of refined lesion procedures. DBS and stereotactic ablation have been successful and widely used for movement disorders. There remains an unmet clinical need: current drug and behavioral treatments offer limited benefit to some seriously ill people. Understandings of the neurocircuitry underlying psychopathology and the response to treatment, while still works in progress, are much enhanced. Here, we review modern lesion procedures and DBS for OCD in the context of neurocircuitry. A key issue is that clinical benefit can be obtained after surgeries targeting different brain structures. This fits well with anatomical models, in which circuits connecting orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), basal ganglia, and thalamus are central to OCD pathophysiology and treatment response. As in movement disorders, dedicated interdisciplinary teams, here led by psychiatrists, are required to implement these procedures and maintain care for patients so treated. Available data, although limited, support the promise of stereotactic ablation or DBS in carefully selected patients. Benefit in such cases appears not to be confined to obsessions and compulsions, but includes changes in affective state. Caution is imperative, and key issues in long-term management of psychiatric neurosurgery patients deserve focused attention. DBS and contemporary ablation also present different patterns of potential benefits and burdens. Translational research to elucidate how targeting specific nodes in putative OCD circuitry might lead to therapeutic gains is accelerating in tandem with clinical use.

Scientific and ethical issues related to deep brain stimulation for disorders of mood, behavior, and thought

CONTEXT

A 2-day consensus conference was held to examine scientific and ethical issues in the application of deep brain stimulation for treating mood and behavioral disorders, such as major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and Tourette syndrome.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives of the conference were to (1) establish consensus among participants about the design of future clinical trials of deep brain stimulation for disorders of mood, behavior, and thought and (2) develop standards for the protection of human subjects participating in such studies.

RESULTS

Conference participants identified 16 key points for guiding research in this growing field.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of the described guidelines would help to protect the safety and rights of research subjects who participate in clinical trials of deep brain stimulation for disorders of mood, behavior, and thought and have further potential to benefit other stakeholders in the research process, including clinical researchers and device manufactures. That said, the adoption of the guidelines will require broad and substantial commitment from many of these same stakeholders.

Preparing the ethical future of deep brain stimulation

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation is an approved and effective neurosurgical intervention for motor disorders such as PD and ET. Deep brain stimulation may also be effective in treating a number of psychiatric disorders, including treatment refractory depression and OCD. Although DBS is a widely accepted therapy in motor disorders, it remains an invasive and expensive procedure. The ethical and social challenges of DBS need further examination, and discussion and emerging applications of DBS in psychiatry may also complicate the ethical landscape of DBS.

METHODS

To identify and characterize current and emerging issues in the use of DBS, we reviewed the neurosurgical literature on DBS as well as the interdisciplinary medical ethics and relevant psychological and sociological literatures. We also consulted the USPTO database, FDA regulations and report decisions, and the business reports of key DBS manufacturers.

RESULTS

Important ethical and social challenges exist in the current and extending practice of DBS, notably in patient selection, informed consent, resource allocation, and in public understanding. These challenges are likely to be amplified if emerging uses of DBS in psychiatry are approved.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review of ethical and social issues related to DBS highlights that several significant challenges, although not insurmountable, need much closer attention. A combination of approaches previously used in neuroethics, such as expert consensus workshops to establish ethical guidelines and public engagement to improve public understanding, may be fruitful to explore.

Neurosurgical treatment of mood disorders: traditional psychosurgery and the advent of deep brain stimulation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

From its peak in the 1940s and 1950s, psychosurgery (or, neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders) has had a gradual decline, with only a few centers around the world continuing with the procedure into the 1980s and 1990s. With recent developments in brain stimulation techniques, the continuing relevance of psychosurgery in the treatment of psychiatric disorders is worthy of examination.

RECENT FINDINGS

A review of databases (PubMed, Medline, Current Contents and Embase) suggests that psychosurgery in the form of stereotactic focal ablation is still practiced in a few centers, although the number has decreased further from the 1990s. Procedures have not changed substantively, although modern imaging and stereotaxy have made them more precise. No good predictors of treatment response have been identified. There is a major shift in interest to deep brain stimulation (DBS) instead of ablative surgery. Studies of DBS in resistant depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder have been few and have involved small numbers, but this field is growing rapidly.

SUMMARY

Although ablative psychosurgery using stereotactic procedures continues to be used to a small extent, psychiatrists remain ambivalent about this procedure. The baton of psychosurgery, however, appears to have been passed on to DBS, but more data are needed on technical details and outcomes before the possible therapeutic role of DBS can be established.