RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several patient and disease characteristics are thought to influence DBS outcomes; however, most previous studies have focused on long-term outcomes with only a few addressing immediate postoperative course. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate predictors of immediate outcomes (postoperative confusion and length of postoperative hospitalization) following deep brain stimulation surgery (DBS) in Parkinson disease (PD) patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of PD patients who underwent DBS at our institution from 2006 to 2011. We computed the proportion of patients with postoperative confusion and those with postoperative hospitalization longer than 2 d. To look for associations, Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical predictors and logistic regression for continuous predictors. RESULTS: We identified 130 patients [71% male, mean age: 63 ± 9.1, mean PD duration: 10.7 ± 5.1]. There were 7 cases of postoperative confusion and 19 of prolonged postoperative hospitalization. Of the 48 patients with tremors, none had postoperative confusion, whereas 10.1% of patients without tremors had confusion (P = .0425). Also, 10.2% of patients with preoperative falls/balance-dysfunction had postoperative confusion, whereas only 1.6% of patients without falls/balance-dysfunction had postoperative confusion (P = .0575). For every one-unit increase in score on the preoperative on-UPDRS III/MDS-UPDRS III score, the odds of having postoperative confusion increased by 10% (P = .0420). The following factors were noninfluential: age, disease duration, dyskinesia, gait freezing, preoperative levodopa-equivalent dose, number of intraoperative microelectrode passes, and laterality/side of surgery. CONCLUSION: Absence of tremors and higher preoperative UPDRS III predicted postoperative confusion after DBS in PD patients. Clinicians' awareness of these predictors can guide their decision making regarding patient selection and surgical planning.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE Ventral intermediate nucleus deep brain stimulation (DBS) for essential tremor is traditionally performed with intraoperative test stimulation and conscious sedation, without general anesthesia (GA). Recently, the authors reported retrospective data on 17 patients undergoing DBS after induction of GA with standardized anatomical coordinates on T1-weighted MRI sequences used for indirect targeting. Here, they compare prospectively collected data from essential tremor patients undergoing DBS both with GA and without GA (non-GA). METHODS Clinical outcomes were prospectively collected at baseline and 3-month follow-up for patients undergoing DBS surgery performed by a single surgeon. Stereotactic, euclidean, and radial errors of lead placement were calculated. Functional (activities of daily living), quality of life (Quality of Life in Essential Tremor [QUEST] questionnaire), and tremor severity outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS Fifty-six patients underwent surgery: 16 without GA (24 electrodes) and 40 with GA (66 electrodes). The mean baseline functional scores and QUEST summary indices were not different between groups (p = 0.91 and p = 0.59, respectively). Non-GA and GA groups did not differ significantly regarding mean postoperative percentages of functional improvement (non-GA, 47.9% vs GA, 48.1%; p = 0.96) or QUEST summary indices (non-GA, 79.9% vs GA, 74.8%; p = 0.50). Accuracy was comparable between groups (mean radial error 0.9 ± 0.3 mm for non-GA and 0.9 ± 0.4 mm for GA patients) (p = 0.75). The mean euclidean error was also similar between groups (non-GA, 1.1 ± 0.6 mm vs GA, 1.2 ± 0.5 mm; p = 0.92). No patient had an intraoperative complication, and the number of postoperative complications was not different between groups (non-GA, n = 1 vs GA, n = 10; p = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS DBS performed with the patient under GA to treat essential tremor is as safe and effective as traditional DBS surgery with intraoperative test stimulation while the patient is under conscious sedation without GA.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Parkinson disease (PD) is associated with a high prevalence of insomnia, affecting up to 88% of patients. Pharmacotherapy studies in the literature addressing insomnia in PD reveal disappointing and inconsistent results. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a novel treatment option with durable effects shown in primary insomnia. However, the lack of accessibility and expense can be limiting. For these reasons, computerized CBT for insomnia (CCBT-I) has been developed. The CCBT-I program is a 6-week web-based course consisting of daily "lessons" providing learnable skills and appropriate recommendations to help patients improve their sleep habits and patterns. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, pilot, randomized controlled trial comparing CCBT-I versus standardized sleep hygiene instructions to treat insomnia in PD. Twenty-eight subjects with PD experiencing insomnia, with a score > 11 on the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) were recruited. Based on a 6-point improvement in ISI in treatment group when compared to controls and an alpha = 0.05 and beta of 0.1 (power = 90%) a sample size of 11 patients (on active treatment) were required to detect this treatment effect using a dependent sample t-test. RESULTS: In total, 8/14 (57%) subjects randomized to CCBT-I versus 13/14 (93%) subjects randomized to standard education completed the study. Among completers, the improvement in ISI scores was greater with CCBT-I as compared to standard education (-7.9 vs -3.5; p = 0.03). However, in an intention-to-treat analysis, where all enrolled subjects were included, the change in ISI between groups was not significant (-.4.5 vs -3.3; p = 0.48), likely due to the high dropout rate in the CCBT-I group (43%). CONCLUSION: This pilot study suggests that CCBT-I can be an effective treatment option for PD patients with insomnia when the course is thoroughly completed. High drop-out rate in our study shows that although effective, it may not be a generalizable option; however, larger studies are needed for further evaluation.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate predictors of quality of life (QOL) and functional outcomes following deep brain stimulation (DBS) in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. The secondary objective was to identify predictors of global improvement. METHODS: PD patients who underwent DBS at our Center from 2006 to 2011 were evaluated by chart review and email/phone survey. Postoperative UPDRS II and EQ-5D were analyzed using simple linear regression adjusting for preoperative score. For global outcomes, we utilized the Patient Global Impression of Change Scale (PGIS) and the Clinician Global Impression of Change Scale (CGIS). RESULTS: There were 130 patients in the dataset. Preoperative and postoperative UPDRS II and EQ-5D were available for 45 patients, PGIS for 67 patients, and CGIS for 116 patients. Patients with falls/postural instability had 6-month functional scores and 1-year QOL scores that were significantly worse than patients without falls/postural instability. For every 1-point increase in preoperative UPDRS III and for every 1-unit increase in body mass index (BMI), the 6-month functional scores significantly worsened. Patients with tremors, without dyskinesia, and without gait-freezing were more likely to have "much" or "very much" improved CGIS. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of postural instability, high BMI, and worse baseline motor scores were the greatest predictors of poorer functional and QOL outcomes after DBS.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Criteria for Parkinson's disease-mild cognitive impairment require a caregiver or patient complaint or clinician observation of cognitive decline and objective evidence of cognitive deficit in at least 1 of 5 cognitive domains. This study examines the accuracy of Parkinson's disease-mild cognitive impairment patient and care partner reports of specific cognitive difficulties. METHODS: A total of 42 Parkinson's disease-mild cognitive impairment patients and their care partners reported the absence or presence of deficits in each cognitive domain during an interview. A deficit in each domain was defined by scores ≤ 1.5 standard deviations below the mean on corresponding cognitive tests. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were modest for patient and care partner reports across all domains. Patients' and care partners' accuracy in observing objectively identified deficits was poor across all domains (≤ 60% agreement; κ ≤ .07). Patient and care partner reports showed moderate agreement in all domains except attention (≥ 74% agreement; κ ≥ .43). CONCLUSIONS: Parkinson's disease-mild cognitive impairment patients and their care partners may not be accurate in identifying specific cognitive deficits. Thus, even patients (and care partners) who correctly report having a cognitive deficit may misidentify the specific deficit. The finding supports the value of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Parkinson's disease-Mild Cognitive Impairment Level II assessment and cautions against relying on subjective report or screening in research in which the nature of cognitive deficit identification or treatment is paramount. Overreliance on patient and care partner reports of specific impairments may distort epidemiologic estimates of mild cognitive impairment subtypes and misdirect cognitive rehabilitation at incorrect domains. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The aim of this work was to describe utilization patterns of dopamine transporter (DaT) scan and its influence on patient management at a single movement disorders center. DaT scan helps differentiate between neurodegenerative from non-neurodegenerative parkinsonism and essential tremor (ET). It has been recently approved in the United States in 2011. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients, observed by movement disorders neurologists, who received a DaT scan. Demographic data, medication use, and prescan diagnosis were collected. RESULTS: A total of 216 DaT scans were performed at our center from 1 June 2011 to 31 October 2012. A total of 175 scans were included for analysis. Rates of DaT scan utilization varied from 5 to 33 per 100 new patients observed. When our specialists suspected neurodegenerative parkinsonism before the scan (N = 70), the scan was abnormal in 57%. When non-neurodegenerative parkinsonism was prescan diagnosis (N = 46), the scan was normal in 65%. When essential/dystonic tremor was suspected (N = 14), the scan was normal in 79%. When psychogenic disorder was the prescan diagnosis (N = 15), the scan was normal in only 47%. Only 4% of patients with abnormal scan remained off anti-PD medications, whereas 24% of patients with negative scan were still on anti-PD medications. CONCLUSIONS: DaT scan utilization among specialists varied greatly. Scan results correlated most when prescan diagnosis was ET than when working diagnosis was neurodegenerative parkinsonism or other non-neurodegenerative parkinsonism. Scan result was least consistent when prescan diagnosis was psychogenic disorder. Finally, DaT scans influenced medical treatment more when it was abnormal, compared to when it was normal.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between socioeconomic status and deep brain stimulation (DBS) outcomes in Parkinson's disease (PD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed a cohort of PD patients who underwent DBS from 2007 to 2011, who had Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement subscale (CGI-I) scores at approximately one year postsurgery. We also analyzed a subgroup of patients who had pre and postoperative Movement Disorders Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part II (functional subscale) and European Quality of Life Scale (EQ5D) scores. We performed regression analyses to determine the association between their median household income and their improvement in the MDS-UPDRS Part II, EQ-5D, and CGI-I post-DBS surgery. RESULTS: We analyzed 125 PD patients with CGI-I at one year post-DBS, including a subset of 43 patients who had pre- and post-DBS MDS-UPDRS Part II and EQ5D scores at 6 and 12 months. Median income was not significantly associated with the one-year CGI-I, the six-month MDS-UPDRS II, and the six-month and one-year EQ5D score. However, after adjusting for preoperative MDS-UPDRS II score, for every $10,000 increase in household median income, there was a 2.15-point improvement on the MDS-UPDRS II score after one year (95% confidence interval = -3.63 to -0.66, p = 0.0060). CONCLUSIONS: PD patients with higher household incomes had better functional improvement at one year. However, this did not necessarily translate to better quality of life or overall clinical improvement when compared with PD patients with lower household incomes. The influence of household income on DBS and other advanced therapies for PD will need further investigation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Unlike dementia, the effect of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) on outcomes after deep brain stimulation (DBS) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is less clear. We aimed to examine the effect of MCI on short- and long-term DBS outcomes. METHODS: To study the effect of MCI type, cognitive domains (attention, language, visuospatial, memory, executive function), and Dementia Rating Scale (DRS) score on immediate postoperative outcomes (postoperative confusion, hospitalization days), PD patients who underwent DBS at our Center from 2006 to 2011 were analyzed. To determine cognitive predictors of intermediate (6-month) and long-term (1-year) post-operative outcomes, the changes in functional and quality-of-life (QOL) scores were analyzed in a smaller group with available preoperative health status measures. RESULTS: We identified 130 patients [71% male, mean age: 63 ± 9.1, mean PD duration: 10.7 ± 5.1]. At preoperative assessment, 60% of patients had multiple-domain MCI, 21% had single-domain MCI, and 19% had normal cognition. MCI presence and type as well as DRS performance did not affect immediate outcomes. Attention impairment predicted longer postoperative hospitalization (P = 0.0015) and showed a trend towards occurrence of postoperative confusion (P = 0.089). For intermediate and long-term outcomes we identified 56 patients [73.2% male, mean age: 61.3 ± 9.6, mean PD duration: 10.6 ± 4.7]. Visuospatial impairment showed a trend towards less improvement in 6-month functional score (P = 0.0652), and 1-year QOL score (P = 0.0517). CONCLUSION: The presence of MCI did not affect DBS outcomes. However, the types of impaired domains were more detrimental. Detailed cognitive testing can help stratify low- and high-risk patients based on their pattern of cognitive dysfunction.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To describe an unusual case of camptocormia responding to levodopa. METHODS: We present a case of camptocormia with a sustained excellent response to levodopa in a patient with negative dopamine transporter and no DYT 5 genetic mutations. RESULTS: We present a 52-year-old man with 2 years' history of progressive camptocormia, with nearly normal posture while standing and forward trunk flexion close to 90 degrees after walking for less than a minute. His posture completely resolved in the supine position. There were no pyramidal or extrapyramidal signs or dystonia in other locations. Family history was noncontributory except 1 paternal aunt with Parkinson disease. There was no history of antidopaminergic exposure. Workup, including brain, cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging and paraspinal muscle electromyography, was unremarkable. Serum ceruloplasmin level was normal. Genetic testing for dopa-responsive dystonia, including GTP cyclohydrolase 1 (GCH 1) and tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) gene mutations (sequencing and deletion), was negative. DYT 6 (THAP1) gene mutation was not found, and dopamine transporter scan imaging obtained 4 years after onset of symptoms was normal. The patient has had an excellent response to levodopa sustained for the past 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Levodopa should be considered in camptocormia even when not associated with neurodegenerative parkinsonism or DYT 5 gene mutation.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)