Cargando…

Assessing the effect of current steering on the total electrical energy delivered and ambulation in Parkinson’s disease

Vertical current steering (vCS) divides current between multiple contacts, which reduces radial spread to fine-tune the electric field shape and improves neuroanatomical targeting. vCS may improve the variable responsiveness of Parkinsonian gait to conventional deep brain stimulation. We hypothesize...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hui, Daphne, Murgai, Aditya A., Gilmore, Greydon, Mohideen, Shabna I., Parrent, Andrew G., Jog, Mandar S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7237436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32427934
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64250-7
Descripción
Sumario:Vertical current steering (vCS) divides current between multiple contacts, which reduces radial spread to fine-tune the electric field shape and improves neuroanatomical targeting. vCS may improve the variable responsiveness of Parkinsonian gait to conventional deep brain stimulation. We hypothesized that vCS elicits greater improvement in ambulation in Parkinson’s disease patients compared to conventional, single-contact stimulation. vCS was implemented with divisions of 70%/30% and 50%/50% and compared to single-contact stimulation with four therapeutic window amplitudes in current-controlled systems. Walking at a self-selected pace was evaluated in seven levodopa-responsive patients. Integrative measures of gait and stimulation parameters were assessed with the functional ambulation performance (FAP) score and total electrical energy delivered (TEED), respectively. A two-tailed Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test assessed the effect of each stimulation condition on FAP and TEED and compared regression slopes; further, a two-tailed Spearman test identified correlations. vCS significantly lowered the TEED (P < 0.0001); however, FAP scores were not different between conditions (P = 0.786). Compared to single-contact stimulation, vCS elicited higher FAP scores with lower TEED (P = 0.031). FAP and TEED were positively correlated in vCS (P = 2.000 × 10(-5), r = 0.397) and single-contact stimulation (P = 0.034, r = 0.205). Therefore, vCS and single-contact stimulation improved ambulation similarly but vCS reduced the TEED and side-effects at higher amplitudes.