SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Deep Brain Stimulation Initiative: Toward Innovative Technology, New Disease Indications, and Approaches to Current and Future Clinical Challenges in Neuromodulation Therapy.

Front Neurol · 2021-01-28

DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.597451PMID: 33584498

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is one of the most important clinical therapies for neurological disorders. DBS also has great potential to become a great tool for clinical neuroscience research. Recently, the National Engineering Laboratory for Neuromodulation at Tsinghua University held an international Deep Brain Stimulation Initiative workshop to discuss the cutting-edge technological achievements and clinical applications of DBS. We specifically addressed new clinical approaches and challenges in DBS for movement disorders (Parkinson's disease and dystonia), clinical application toward neurorehabilitation for stroke, and the progress and challenges toward DBS for neuropsychiatric disorders. This review highlighted key developments in (1) neuroimaging, with advancements in 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging DBS compatibility for exploration of brain network mechanisms; (2) novel DBS recording capabilities for uncovering disease pathophysiology; and (3) overcoming global healthcare burdens with online-based DBS programming technology for connecting patient communities. The successful event marks a milestone for global collaborative opportunities in clinical development of neuromodulation to treat major neurological disorders.

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.