Cargando…

The Role of Levodopa Challenge in Predicting the Outcome of Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN‐DBS) is an effective and evidence‐based treatment for idiopathic Parkinson's disease (iPD). A minority of patients does not sufficiently benefit from STN‐DBS. OBJECTIVE: The predictive validity of the levodopa challenge for indi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wolke, Robin, Becktepe, Jos Steffen, Paschen, Steffen, Helmers, Ann‐Kristin, Kübler‐Weller, Dorothee, Youn, Jinyoung, Brinker, Dana, Bergman, Hagai, Kühn, Andrea A., Fasano, Alfonso, Deuschl, Günther
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10450242/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37635781
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mdc3.13825
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN‐DBS) is an effective and evidence‐based treatment for idiopathic Parkinson's disease (iPD). A minority of patients does not sufficiently benefit from STN‐DBS. OBJECTIVE: The predictive validity of the levodopa challenge for individual patients is analyzed. METHODS: Data from patients assessed with a preoperative Levodopa‐test and a follow‐up examination (mean ± standard deviation: 9.15 months ±3.39) from Kiel (n = 253), Berlin (n = 78) and Toronto (n = 98) were studied. Insufficient DBS outcome was defined as an overall UPDRS‐III reduction <33% compared to UPDRS‐III in med‐off at baseline or alternatively if the minimal clinically important improvement of 5 points was not reached. Single UPDRS‐items and sub‐scores were dichotomized. Following exploratory analysis, we trained supervised regression‐ and classification models for outcome prediction. RESULTS: Data analysis confirmed significant correlation between the absolute UPDRS‐III reduction during Levodopa challenge and after stimulation. But individual improvement was inaccurately predicted with a large range of up to 30 UPDRS III points. Further analysis identified preoperative UPDRS‐III/med‐off‐scores and preoperative Levodopa‐improvement as most influential factors. The models for UPDRS‐III and sub‐scores improvement achieved comparably low accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: With large prediction intervals, the Levodopa challenge use for patient counseling is limited, though remains important for excluding non‐responders to Levodopa. Despite these deficiencies, the current practice of patient selection is highly successful and builds not only on the Levodopa challenge. However, more specific motor tasks and further paraclinical tools for prediction need to be developed.