Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) at the globus pallidus pars internus (GPi) is an effective treatment for some patients with medically refractory torsion dystonia. In this chapter we review the classification and treatment of torsion dystonia including the current indications for DBS surgery. Details of the DBS procedure and programming of the DBS devices are discussed. Pallidal DBS is most effective in patients with primary generalized dystonia. Children and adolescents possessing the DYT1 gene mutation may respond best of all. Patients with cervical dystonia may also improve with pallidal DBS but definitive clinical evidence is lacking. As a group, patients with secondary dystonias respond less well to DBS than do patients with primary dystonia; however, patients with dystonia secondary to anoxic brain injury who have grossly intact basal ganglia anatomy, and patients with tardive dystonia may represent secondary dystonia subtypes for whom pallidal DBS is a viable option.

Pallidal deep brain stimulation is an efficient treatment option in those patients with cervical dystonia who do not benefit from conservative treatment including local botulinum toxin injections. Given the fact that other surgical treatment options such as selective peripheral denervation are available, it may be considered third-line treatment in most instances. Chronic bilateral pallidal stimulation improves dystonic posture and movements, pain caused by dystonia and disability related to dystonia. Preliminary data on longterm follow-up confirm its beneficial effect in the majority of patients. Given the frequency of cervical dystonia, pallidal deep brain stimulation will play a major role in the future.

With the renaissance of stereotactic pallidotomy for Parkinson’s disease in 1990s, pallidotomy has become increasingly used as an effective treatment for various manifestations of medically refractory dystonia. More recently, deep brain stimulation of globus pallidus internus (GPi) has been replacing pallidotomy. Although GPi DBS has great promise for treating dystonia, there are some disadvantages. We introduce our experiences in subthalamic nucleus (STN) DBS for primary dystonia and tardive dystonia in this chapter. We propose that STN DBS has the following advantages over GPi DBS: (1) symptomatic improvement is seen immediately after stimulation, allowing us to quickly select the most suitable stimulation parameters; (2) the stimulation parameters for the STN are lower than those used for the GPi, resulting in longer battery life; and (3) STN DBS results in better symptomatic control than GPi DBS in dystonia patients when our STN data is compared to that obtained by others with using the GPi as the target. We suggest that STN DBS may be the most appropriate surgical technique for dystonia.

Tourette syndrome is a neuropsychiatric disorder with onset in early childhood and characterized by tics, often associated with behavioural abnormalities. Symptoms often disappear before or during adulthood. Treatment consists of psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy. A small percentage of patients is treatment refractory. After the introduction of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the thalamus as a new therapeutical approach in 1999, several other brain nuclei have been targeted in a small number of patients, like the globus pallidus internus, anteromedial and ventroposterolateral part, and the nucleus accumbens. In the published reports, a tic reduction rate of at least 66% is described. The effects of DBS on associated behavioural disorders are more variable. The number of treated patients is small and it is unclear whether the effects of DBS are dependent on the target nucleus. The pathophysiology of Tourette syndrome is not well understood. On the basis of our current knowledge of cortico-basal ganglia-thalamocortical circuits, an explanation for the beneficial effects of DBS on tics is proposed. It is concluded that a meticulous evaluation of the electrode position, and a blinded assessment of the clinical effects on tics and behavioural disorders, is absolutely mandatory in order to identify the best target of DBS for Tourette syndrome.

Extradural cortical stimulation is a recent addition to the armamentarium of operative neuromodulation. Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) is offered by positioning a stimulating plate extradurally on the primary motor cortex. It is a minimally invasive technique that was originally proposed for the control of central neuropathic pain. Currently, its use has been extended to patients with movement disorders. The need for minimally invasive therapies, with low morbidity-mortality which can be applied to patients who are excluded from deep brain stimulation (DBS), led to the first attempt of MCS in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Following the demonstration that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is beneficial in PD, we attempted direct extradural MCS on patients with advanced PD not meeting the criteria for DBS. The mechanisms of action may include “hyperdirect” motor cortex-subthalamic nucleus (MI-STN) input, inhibition, resynchronisation, plasticity changes, interhemispheric transfer of inhibition/excitation and modulation of other cortical areas. In this article, we review the mechanism of action of MCS in movement disorders, the predictive factors of MCS efficacy in PD, the indications, particularly in the elderly who are not suitable for DBS, the adverse effects, and the technique for localization of the central sulcus and for performing the procedure. The future prospects and developments are also discussed.

In 2000, Canavero and Paolotti reported the improvement of symptoms in a case of advanced Parkinson disease (PD), following chronic epidural motor cortex stimulation (MCS). In 2002, the same group reported the results obtained in 2 patients with PD. Unilateral MCS proved to be beneficial bilaterally. They concluded that MCS may represent a cost-effective alternative to deep brain stimulation. In 2003, Pagni promoted an Italian Multicenter Study and in June 2005 the results in the first 29 cases were reported. Any symptom of PD could be modulated by MCS, but improvement of different symptoms was variable and unpredictable, with some patients being unresponsive. L-Dopa induced dyskinesias, painful dystonia and motor fluctuations were satisfactorily controlled. In the author’s series, 2 patients were unresponsive and 5 patients showed a clinical improvement, particularly evident in the off-medication state; UPDRS-III mean improvement was 30% at 3 months and 22% at 12 months. Quality of life (QOL) also improved. Assessment by the Parkinon’s disease quality of life (PDQL) scale showed a mean decrease by 26% at 12 months. No complication or adverse events were observed. These preliminary data indicated the possibility to modulate PD symptoms by MCS. Several unsettled issues remain such as the optimal electrode position, the best stimulation parameters, the usefulness of unilateral versus bilateral stimulation, the prognostic factors for best selection of patients, and the optimal assessment of clinical effects. The mechanisms of MCS may be only the subject of hypothesis.

The anatomical connections of the anterior lobe of the cerebellum with the reticular formation in the brainstem, upper motor neurons and the limbic system, as well as the results of experimental and clinical observations indicate that this region is a proper area for modulation of certain types of central motor disorders but also of limbic functions. Through a direct stereotacticaly suboccipital approach electrodes were introduced into the anterior lobe of the cerebellum in four patients (3 females and one male, 24, 29, 45 and 19 years old, respectively) suffering from cerebral palsy and being confined to a wheelchair with severe spastic choreoathetoid movements, with minimal hand function, but in good mental state. After a period of test stimulation (up to 10 days), the pulse generators were implanted and chronic high-frequency stimulation was applied (for 37, 58, 9 and 32 months, respectively). In agreement with our previous experience (transtentorial approach in 30 patients), noticeable improvements in spasticity were immediate and a gradual reduction in choreoatetoid movements was observed in the following days to weeks. Improvements in speech, swallowing, respiration, posture, ambulation, and mood states were combined with development of new motor skills. Caution with the proper positioning of the electrode in the target and the selection of optimal program for stimulation are of paramount importance.

Over the last ten years there has been a progressively increasing interest in the research and clinical application of implantable electrical brain stimulation devices in the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy. The concept is not new, but the efforts were strengthened and accelerated after the efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation in controlling epilepsy was first demonstrated in the early 1990s and gained subsequently the approval of the USA Food and Drug Administration in 1997. This chapter reviews the progress made in this field. Special emphasis is given to the most important available evidence from animal and human studies, the neuroanatomical pathways and the role of the relevant neurotransmitters, the stimulation devices and the significance of correct programming of the stimulation parameters. The chapter also examines the antiepileptic efficacy of stimulation in all the known targets including vagus nerve, cerebellum, thalamus, subthalamic nucleus, locus ceruleus, and epileptogenic cortex. On the basis of the current evidence, the future directions of this exciting field are described.

Brain stimulation has been receiving increasing attention as an alternative therapy for epilepsy that cannot be treated by either antiepileptic medication or surgical resection of the epileptogenic focus. The stimulation methods include transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or electrical stimulation by implanted devices of the vagus nerve (VNS), deep brain structures (DBS) (thalamic or hippocampal), cerebellar or cortical areas. TMS is the simplest and least invasive approach. However, the most common epileptogenic areas (mesial temporal structures) probably lie too deep beneath the surface of the skull for effective TMS. The efficacy of VNS in reducing the frequency or severity of seizures is quite variable and depends on many factors which are currently investigated. VNS is well-tolerated and approved in many countries. DBS is much more invasive than either TMS or VNS. Currently, a number of targets for DBS are investigated including caudate, centromedian or anterior thalamic nuclei, and subthalamic nucleus. Direct stimulation of the epileptic cortical focus is another approach to the neuromodulation in epilepsy. Finally, another line of research investigates the usefulness of implantable seizure detection devices. The current chapter presents the most important evidence on the above methods. Furthermore, other important issues are reviewed such as the selection criteria of patients for brain stimulation and the potential role of brain stimulation in the treatment of depression in epileptic patients.

Patients with refractory epilepsy present a particular challenge to new therapies. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for the control of intractable seizures has become available since 1989. VNS is a relatively noninvasive treatment. It reduces seizure frequency by ≥50% in 1/3 of patients; an additional 1/3 of patients experience a worthwhile reduction of seizure frequency between 30 and 50%. In the remaining 1/3 of the patients there is little or no effect. Efficacy has a tendency to improve with longer duration of treatment up to 18 months postoperatively. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) or direct electrical stimulation of brain areas is an alternative neurostimulation modality. The cerebellum, various thalamic nuclei, the pallidum, and, more recently, medial temporal lobe structures have been chosen as targets. DBS for epilepsy is beyond the stage of proof-of-concept but still needs thorough evaluation in confirmatory pilot studies before it can be offered to larger patient populations. Analysis of larger patient groups and insight in the mode of action may help to identify patients with epileptic seizures or syndromes that respond better either to VNS or to DBS. Randomized and controlled studies in larger patient series are mandatory to identify the potential treatment population and optimal stimulation paradigms. Further improvements of clinical efficacy may result from these studies.