Comparison of Awake vs. Asleep Surgery for Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease

Background Deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery for Parkinson's disease (PD) is usually performed as awake surgery allowing sufficient intraoperative testing. Recently, outcomes after asleep surgery have been assumed comparable. However, direct comparisons between awake and asleep surgery are s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neuromodulation (Malden, Mass.) Mass.), 2018-08, Vol.21 (6), p.541-547
Hauptverfasser: Blasberg, Fabian, Wojtecki, Lars, Elben, Saskia, Slotty, Philipp Jörg, Vesper, Jan, Schnitzler, Alfons, Groiss, Stefan Jun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery for Parkinson's disease (PD) is usually performed as awake surgery allowing sufficient intraoperative testing. Recently, outcomes after asleep surgery have been assumed comparable. However, direct comparisons between awake and asleep surgery are scarce. Objective To investigate the difference between awake and asleep surgery comparing motor and nonmotor outcome after subthalamic nucleus (STN)‐DBS in a large single center PD population. Methods Ninety‐six patients were retrospectively matched pairwise (48 asleep and 48 awake) and compared regarding improvement of Unified PD Rating Scale Motor Score (UPDRS‐III), cognitive function, Levodopa‐equivalent‐daily‐dose (LEDD), stimulation amplitudes, side effects, surgery duration, and complication rates. Routine testing took place at three months and one year postoperatively. Results Chronic DBS effects (UPDRS‐III without medication and with stimulation on [OFF/ON]) significantly improved UPDRS‐III only after awake surgery at three months and in both groups one year postoperatively. Acute effects (percentage UPDRS‐III reduction after activation of stimulation) were also significantly better after awake surgery at three months but not at one year compared to asleep surgery. UPDRS‐III subitems “freezing” and “speech” were significantly worse after asleep surgery at three months and one year, respectively. LEDD was significantly lower after awake surgery only one week postoperatively. The other measures did not differ between groups. Conclusions Overall motor function improved faster in the awake surgery group, but the difference ceased after one year. However, axial subitems were worse in the asleep surgery group suggesting that worsening of axial symptoms was risked improving overall motor function. Awake surgery still seems advantageous for STN‐DBS in PD, although asleep surgery may be considered with lower threshold in patients not suitable for awake surgery.
ISSN:1094-7159
1525-1403
DOI:10.1111/ner.12766