Characterizing the Intraoperative Microelectrode Recording-Induced Microlesion Effect on Motor Symptoms in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease Undergoing Deep Brain Stimulation of the Subthalamic Nucleus
AIM: To investigate microelectrode recording (MER)-induced microlesion effect (MLE) on the motor symptoms of 30 patients withParkinson’s disease (PD) who underwent deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.MATERIAL and METHODS: MER-induced MLE was evaluated based on the difference between tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesiascores in the preoperative off-state and intraoperative state following MER and before test stimulation.RESULTS: MLE scores improved by 21.7% [left (L) side] and by 13.6% [right (R) side] from baseline (p 0.05).CONCLUSION: MER-induced MLE improved motor symptoms and was not correlated with the number of microelectrodes usedduring the procedure.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:AIM: To investigate microelectrode recording (MER)-induced microlesion effect (MLE) on the motor symptoms of 30 patients withParkinson’s disease (PD) who underwent deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.MATERIAL and METHODS: MER-induced MLE was evaluated based on the difference between tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesiascores in the preoperative off-state and intraoperative state following MER and before test stimulation.RESULTS: MLE scores improved by 21.7% [left (L) side] and by 13.6% [right (R) side] from baseline (p 0.05).CONCLUSION: MER-induced MLE improved motor symptoms and was not correlated with the number of microelectrodes usedduring the procedure.
📊
Key Findings & Data:AIM: To investigate microelectrode recording (MER)-induced microlesion effect (MLE) on the motor symptoms of 30 patients withParkinson’s disease (PD) who underwent deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.MATERIAL and METHODS: MER-induced MLE was evaluated based on the difference between tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesiascores in the preoperative off-state and intraoperative state following MER and before test stimulation.RESULTS: MLE scores improved by 21.7% [left (L) side] and by 13.6% [right (R) side] from baseline (p 0.05).CONCLUSION: MER-induced MLE improved motor symptoms and was not correlated with the number of microelectrodes usedduring the procedure.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:AIM: To investigate microelectrode recording (MER)-induced microlesion effect (MLE) on the motor symptoms of 30 patients withParkinson’s disease (PD) who underwent deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.MATERIAL and METHODS: MER-induced MLE was evaluated based on the difference between tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesiascores in the preoperative off-state and intraoperative state following MER and before test stimulation.RESULTS: MLE scores improved by 21.7% [left (L) side] and by 13.6% [right (R) side] from baseline (p 0.05).CONCLUSION: MER-induced MLE improved motor symptoms and was not correlated with the number of microelectrodes usedduring the procedure.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Özet
AIM: To investigate microelectrode recording (MER)-induced microlesion effect (MLE) on the motor symptoms of 30 patients withParkinson’s disease (PD) who underwent deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.MATERIAL and METHODS: MER-induced MLE was evaluated based on the difference between tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesiascores in the preoperative off-state and intraoperative state following MER and before test stimulation.RESULTS: MLE scores improved by 21.7% [left (L) side] and by 13.6% [right (R) side] from baseline (p 0.05).CONCLUSION: MER-induced MLE improved motor symptoms and was not correlated with the number of microelectrodes usedduring the procedure.
🔖
Cite This Article
AYGÜN, D., DERE, U. A., YILDIZ, O., TEMEL, Y., KOCABICAK, E. (2019). Characterizing the Intraoperative Microelectrode Recording-Induced Microlesion Effect on Motor Symptoms in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease Undergoing Deep Brain Stimulation of the Subthalamic Nucleus. Turkish Neurosurgery, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 3, 430–433. https://ajindex.com/articles/404391
Alkemade A, de Hollander G, Keuken MC, Schafer A, Ott DVM, Schwarz J, Weise D, Kotz SA, Forstmann BU: Comparison of T2*-weighted and QSM contrasts in Parkinson’s disease to visualize the STN with MRI. PLoS One 12:e0176130, 2017 2. Cersosimo MG, Raina GB, Benarroch EE, Piedimonte F, Aleman GG, Micheli FE: Micro lesion effect of the globus pallidus internus and outcome with deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson disease and dystonia. Mov Disord 24:1488-1493, 2009 3. Chiken S, Nambu A: High-frequency pallidal stimulation disrupts information flow through the pallidum by GABAergic inhibition. J Neurosci 33:2268-2280, 2013 4. Derrey S, Lefaucheur R, Chastan N, Gerardin E, Hannequin D, Desbordes M, Maltete D: Alleviation of off-period dystonia in Parkinson disease by a microlesion following subthalamic implantation. J Neurosurg 112:1263-1266, 2010 5. Deuschl G, Schade-Brittinger C, Krack P, Volkmann J, Schafer H, Botzel K, Daniels C, Deutschlander A, Dillmann U, Eisner W, Gruber D, Hamel W, Herzog J, Hilker R, Klebe S, Kloss M, Koy J, Krause M, Kupsch A, Lorenz D, Lorenzl S, Mehdorn HM, Moringlane JR, Oertel W, Pinsker MO, Reichmann H, Reuss A, Schneider GH, Schnitzler A, Steude U, Sturm V, Timmermann L, Tronnier V, Trottenberg T, Wojtecki L, Wolf E, Poewe W, Voges J: A randomized trial of deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. N Engl J Med 355:896-908, 2006 6. Fahn S, Elton R, Members of the UPDRS Development Committee: Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale. In: Fahn S, Marsden CD, Calne DB, Goldstein M, (eds). Recent Developments in Parkinson’s Disease, Vol 2. Florham Park, NJ. Macmillan Health Care Information, 1987:153-163, 293- 304 7. Haberler C, Alesch F, Mazal PR, Pilz P, Jellinger K, Pinter MM, Hainfellner JA, Budka H: No tissue damage by chronic deep brain stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. Annals of Neurology 48:372-376, 2000 8. Janssen MLF, Temel Y, Delaville C, Zwartjes DGM, Heida T, De Deurwaerdère P, Visser-Vandewalle V, Benazzouz A: Corticosubthalamic inputs from the motor, limbic, and associative areas in normal and dopamine-depleted rats are not fully segregated. Brain Struct Funct 222(6):2473-2485, 2017 9. Kocabicak E, Alptekin O, Ackermans L, Kubben P, Kuijf M, Kurt E, Esselink R, Temel Y: Is there still need for microelectrode recording now the subthalamic nucleus can be well visualized with high field and ultrahigh MR imaging? Front Integr Neurosci 9:46, 2015 10. Kocabicak E, Aygun D, Ozaydin I, Jahanshahi A, Tan S