Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2022
A Randomized, Double-Blinded Crossover Trial of Short Versus Conventional Pulse Width Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАEquivalence TrialНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Petry-Schmelzer Jan Niklas, Gerus Lisa, Jergas Hannah, Reker Paul, Steffen Julia K, Dafsari Haidar S, Baldermann Juan Carlos, Fink Gereon R, Visser-Vandewalle Veerle, Dembek Till A, Barbe Michael T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) is a well-established treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease. Previous acute challenge studies suggested that short pulse widths might increase the therapeutic window while maintaining motor symptom control with a decrease in energy consumption. However, only little is known about the effect of short pulse width stimulation beyond the setting of an acute challenge.
OBJECTIVE: To compare 4 weeks of STN-DBS with conventional pulse width stimulation (60 μs) to 4 weeks of STN-DBS with short pulse width stimulation (30 μs) regarding motor symptom control.
METHODS: This study was a monocentric, double-blinded, randomized crossover non-inferiority trial investigating whether short pulse width stimulation with 30 μs maintains equal motor control as conventional 60 μs stimulation over a period of 4 weeks (German Clinical Trials Register No. DRKS00017528). Primary outcome was the difference in motor symptom control as assessed by a motor diary. Secondary outcomes included energy consumption measures, non-motor effects, side-effects, and quality of life.
RESULTS: Due to a high dropout rate, the calculated sample size of 27 patients was not met and 24 patients with Parkinson's disease and STN-DBS were included in the final analysis. However, there were no differences in any investigated outcome parameter between the two treatment conditions.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that short pulse width settings (30 μs) provide non-inferior motor symptom control as conventional (60 μs) stimulation without significant differences in energy consumption. Future studies are warranted to evaluate a potential benefit of short pulse width settings in patients with pronounced dyskinesia.
OBJECTIVE: To compare 4 weeks of STN-DBS with conventional pulse width stimulation (60 μs) to 4 weeks of STN-DBS with short pulse width stimulation (30 μs) regarding motor symptom control.
METHODS: This study was a monocentric, double-blinded, randomized crossover non-inferiority trial investigating whether short pulse width stimulation with 30 μs maintains equal motor control as conventional 60 μs stimulation over a period of 4 weeks (German Clinical Trials Register No. DRKS00017528). Primary outcome was the difference in motor symptom control as assessed by a motor diary. Secondary outcomes included energy consumption measures, non-motor effects, side-effects, and quality of life.
RESULTS: Due to a high dropout rate, the calculated sample size of 27 patients was not met and 24 patients with Parkinson's disease and STN-DBS were included in the final analysis. However, there were no differences in any investigated outcome parameter between the two treatment conditions.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that short pulse width settings (30 μs) provide non-inferior motor symptom control as conventional (60 μs) stimulation without significant differences in energy consumption. Future studies are warranted to evaluate a potential benefit of short pulse width settings in patients with pronounced dyskinesia.