Explore the vast range of titles available.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical procedure that allows targeted circuit-based neuromodulation. DBS is a standard of care in Parkinson disease, essential tremor and dystonia, and is also under active investigation for other conditions linked to pathological circuitry, including major depressive disorder and Alzheimer disease. Modern DBS systems, borrowed from the cardiac field, consist of an intracranial electrode, an extension wire and a pulse generator, and have evolved slowly over the past two decades. Advances in engineering and imaging along with an improved understanding of brain disorders are poised to reshape how DBS is viewed and delivered to patients. Breakthroughs in electrode and battery designs, stimulation paradigms, closed-loop and on-demand stimulation, and sensing technologies are expected to enhance the efficacy and tolerability of DBS. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the technical development of DBS, from its origins to its future. Understanding the evolution of DBS technology helps put the currently available systems in perspective and allows us to predict the next major technological advances and hurdles in the field.Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical procedure that allows targeted circuit-based neuromodulation and has become a standard of care in a range of movement disorders. This Review discusses the evolution and current status of DBS technology and anticipates future advances.

The effects of constant-current deep brain stimulation (DBS) have not been studied in controlled trials in patients with Parkinson's disease. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of bilateral constant-current DBS of the subthalamic nucleus. This prospective, randomised, multicentre controlled trial was done between Sept 26, 2005, and Aug 13, 2010, at 15 clinical sites specialising in movement disorders in the USA. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18–80 years, had Parkinson's disease for 5 years or more, and had either 6 h or more daily off time reported in a patient diary of moderate to severe dyskinesia during waking hours. The patients received bilateral implantation in the subthalamic nucleus of a constant-current DBS device. After implantation, computer-generated randomisation was done with a block size of four, and patients were randomly assigned to the stimulation or control group (stimulation:control ratio 3:1). The control group received implantation without activation for 3 months. No blinding occurred during this study, and both patients and investigators were aware of the treatment group. The primary outcome variable was the change in on time without bothersome dyskinesia (ie, good quality on time) at 3 months as recorded in patients' diaries. Patients were followed up for 1 year. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00552474. Of 168 patients assessed for eligibility, 136 had implantation of the constant-current device and were randomly assigned to receive immediate (101 patients) or delayed (35 patients) stimulation. Both study groups reported a mean increase of good quality on time after 3 months, and the increase was greater in the stimulation group (4·27 h vs 1·77 h, difference 2·51 [95% CI 0·87–4·16]; p=0·003). Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale motor scores in the off-medication, on-stimulation condition improved by 39% from baseline (24·8 vs 40·8). Some serious adverse events occurred after DBS implantation, including infections in five (4%) of 136 patients and intracranial haemorrhage in four (3%) patients. Stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus was associated with dysarthria, fatigue, paraesthesias, and oedema, whereas gait problems, disequilibrium, dyskinesia, and falls were reported in both groups. Constant-current DBS of the subthalamic nucleus produced significant improvements in good quality on time when compared with a control group without stimulation. Future trials should compare the effects of constant-current DBS with those of voltage-controlled stimulation. St Jude Medical Neuromodulation Division.

Deep brain stimulation is a promising treatment for severe depression, but lack of efficacy in randomized trials raises questions regarding anatomical targeting. We implanted multi-site intracranial electrodes in a severely depressed patient and systematically assessed the acute response to focal electrical neuromodulation. We found an elaborate repertoire of distinctive emotional responses that were rapid in onset, reproducible, and context and state dependent. Results provide proof of concept for personalized, circuit-specific medicine in psychiatry. Acute mapping of responses to focal electrical neuromodulation in a patient with treatment-resistant depression reveals distinct mood and symptom changes that are highly context dependent.

\"With the burden of brain disorders increasing worldwide, there has been a resurgence of interest in techniques to control the brain and thereby improve its function. Yet how realistic are these expectations and what are the ethical implications? This book reviews the main techniques that can enable patients to use their brains for communication and control and doctors to modify brain function. It explains how paralysed patients may be helped through brain reading, how brain stimulation can help to improve Parkinson's disease and certain mental disorders and how patients can be trained to regulate their own brain activity through neurofeedback. Brain Control situates the application of these techniques within ethical and legal debates on the principles of autonomy and fairness, and suggests ethical standards for their future development\"-- Provided by publisher.

Efficacy in previous studies of surgical treatments of refractory multiple sclerosis tremor using lesioning or deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been variable. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of dual-lead thalamic DBS (one targeting the ventralis intermedius–ventralis oralis posterior nucleus border [the VIM lead] and one targeting the ventralis oralis anterior–ventralis oralis posterior border [the VO lead]) for the treatment of multiple sclerosis tremor. We did a single centre, single-blind, prospective, randomised pilot trial at the University of Florida Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration clinic (Gainesville, FL, USA). We recruited adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of multiple sclerosis tremor refractory to previous medical therapy. Before surgery to implant both leads, we randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive 3 months of optimised single-lead DBS—either VIM or VO. We did the randomisation with a computer-generated sequence, using three blocks of four patients, and independent members of the Center did the assignment. Patients and all clinicians other than the DBS programming nurse were masked to the choice of lead. Patients underwent surgery 1 month after their baseline visit for implantation of the dual lead DBS system. A pulse generator and two extension cables were implanted in a second surgery 3–4 weeks later. Patients then received an initial 3-month period of continuous stimulation of either the VIM or VO lead followed by blinded safety assessment of their tremor with the Tolosa-Fahn-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (TRS) during optimised VIM or VO lead stimulation at the end of the 3 months. After this visit, both leads were activated in all patients for an additional 3 months, and optimally programmed during serial visits as dictated by a prespecified programming algorithm. At the 6-month follow-up visit, TRS score was measured, and mood and psychological batteries were administered under four stimulation conditions: VIM on, VO on, both on, and both off (the order of testing was chosen by a computer-generated random sequence, assigned by independent members of the centre, and enacted by an unmasked DBS programming nurse). Each of four stimulation settings were tested over 4 consecutive days, with stimulation settings held constant for at least 12 h before testing. The primary outcome was change in mean total TRS score at the 6-month postoperative assessment with both leads activated, compared with the preoperative baseline mean TRS score. Analysis was by intention to treat. Safety was analysed in all patients who received the surgical implantation except in one patient who discontinued before the safety assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00954421. Between Jan 16, 2007, and Dec 17, 2013, we enrolled 12 patients who were randomly assigned either to 3 initial months of VIM-only or VO-only stimulation. One patient from the VO-only group developed an infection necessitating DBS explantation, and was excluded from the assessment of the primary outcome. Compared with the mean baseline TRS score of 57·0 (SD 10·2), the mean score at 6 months decreased to 40·1 (17·6), −29·6% reduction; t=–0·28, p=0·03. Three of 11 patients did not respond to surgical intervention. One patient died suddenly 2 years after surgery, but this was judged to be unrelated to DBS implantation. Serious adverse events included a superficial wound infection in one patient that resolved with antibiotic therapy, and transient altered mental status and late multiple sclerosis exacerbation in another patient. The most common non-serious adverse events were headache and fatigue. Dual lead thalamic DBS might be a safe and effective option for improving severe, refractory multiple sclerosis tremor. Larger studies are necessary to show whether this technique is widely applicable, safe in the long-term, and effective in treating multiple sclerosis tremor or other severe tremor disorders. US National Institutes of Health, the Cathy Donnellan, Albert E Einstein, and Birdie W Einstein Fund, and the William Merz Professorship.

In 1998, we proposed deep brain stimulation as a last-resort treatment option for patients suffering from severe, treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Here, 24 OCD patients were included in a long-term follow-up study to evaluate the effects of electrical stimulation in the anterior limbs of the internal capsule (ALIC) and bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BST). We find that electrical stimulation in the ALIC/BST area is safe and significantly decreases obsessions, compulsions, and associated anxiety and depressive symptoms, and improves global functioning in a blinded crossover trial ( n =17), after 4 years ( n =18), and at last follow-up (up to 171 months, n =24). Moreover, our data indicate that BST may be a better stimulation target compared with ALIC to alleviate OCD symptoms. We conclude that electrical stimulation in BST is a promising therapeutic option for otherwise treatment-resistant OCD patients.

Deep brain stimulation is a promising treatment for neuropsychiatric conditions such as major depression. It could be optimized by identifying neural biomarkers that trigger therapy selectively when symptom severity is elevated. We developed an approach that first used multi-day intracranial electrophysiology and focal electrical stimulation to identify a personalized symptom-specific biomarker and a treatment location where stimulation improved symptoms. We then implanted a chronic deep brain sensing and stimulation device and implemented a biomarker-driven closed-loop therapy in an individual with depression. Closed-loop therapy resulted in a rapid and sustained improvement in depression. Future work is required to determine if the results and approach of this n -of-1 study generalize to a broader population. This case report describes a biomarker-driven closed-loop therapy for depression using implanted electrodes to continually sense brain activity and automatically trigger direct brain electrical stimulation in high-depression states.