SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Three-Year Gait and Axial Outcomes of Bilateral STN and GPi Parkinson's Disease Deep Brain Stimulation.

Front Hum Neurosci · 2020-02-11

DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00001PMID: 32116598

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Objective: To examine the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of the bilateral subthalamic nucleus (STN) and globus pallidus internus (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) on gait and axial symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. Available data have been inconsistent and mostly short-term regarding the effect of both brain targets on gait and axial symptoms. We aimed to identify potential target specific differences at 3-year follow-up from a large single-center experience. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed short-term (6-month follow-up) and long-term (36-month follow-up) changes in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II and III total scores of 72 PD patients (53 with bilateral STN-DBS and 19 with bilateral GPi-DBS). An interdisciplinary team made target-specific decisions for each DBS patient. We analyzed changes in gait and axial subscores derived from UPDRS II and III. Results: In both the STN- and GPi-DBS cohorts, we observed no significant differences in gait and axial UPDRS derived subscores in the off-med/on stimulation state at long-term follow-up when compared to baseline. On-med axial scores remained similar in the short-term but worsened in both groups (STN, 2.23 ± 3.43, p p p Conclusions: The study showed that long-term both STN- and GPi-DBS had a similar effect on gait and axial symptoms in UPDRS derived subscores at 36-month follow-up despite potential baseline differences in criteria for selection of each target. More sophisticated measures of gait and balance beyond the categorical UPDRS score will be needed for future studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.