Gamma knife versus linear accelerator thalamotomy for essential tremor and Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Clinical Neuroscience Pub Date : 2025-01-16 DOI:10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111050
Renuka Chintapalli , Stephano Chang , Tania Kaprealian , Ricky Savjani , Stephen Tenn , Ausaf Bari
{"title":"Gamma knife versus linear accelerator thalamotomy for essential tremor and Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Renuka Chintapalli ,&nbsp;Stephano Chang ,&nbsp;Tania Kaprealian ,&nbsp;Ricky Savjani ,&nbsp;Stephen Tenn ,&nbsp;Ausaf Bari","doi":"10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Tremor, either in patients with Essential Tremor (ET) or Parkinson’s disease (PD), constitutes the most common movement disorder. Stereotactic radiosurgery using Gamma Knife (GK) and linear accelerator (LINAC) systems, is an effective, incisionless treatment modality for ET and PD. Although these technologies have been used clinically since the 1990′s, most studies have focused on GK, and efficacy, safety and time to treatment effect (latency) of GK and LINAC have not been compared.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We therefore aimed to conduct a systematic review with network <em>meta</em>-analysis examining efficacy, adverse events (AEs) and latency of GK and LINAC for treating tremor in ET and PD.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a systematic review with network <em>meta</em>-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, using the Embase and PubMed databases. We included all primary GK/LINAC thalamotomy studies in ET/PD patients with at least 6 months of follow-up, reporting unilateral Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Scale (FTM-TRS) or Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale (UPDRS) scores pre-treatment/post-treatment and/or AEs and/or latency. The primary efficacy outcome was FTM-TRS Scale A or UPDRS Item 16 score reduction. AEs were presented as an estimated incidence, and latency as average time to first recorded clinical improvement in tremor.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Six studies of 311 patients and 2 studies of 60 patients met inclusion criteria for GK/LINAC efficacy comparison, respectively. Network <em>meta</em>-analysis showed similar tremor reduction between modalities (standardized mean difference between pre- and post-treatment scores: GK: −2.18 (95 % CI: −2.79, −1.57); LINAC: −2.13 (95 % CI: −5.13, 0.87). GK also had a higher absolute AE rate, while LINAC was associated with a greater latency period. There was no correlation between GK efficacy and AE rate.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Despite the relatively small sample sizes, these results demonstrate similar efficacy between GK and LINAC for ET and PD, with a trend toward higher efficacy but greater AE incidence and slower onset of tremor improvement in GK compared to LINAC.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15487,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"133 ","pages":"Article 111050"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967586825000220","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Tremor, either in patients with Essential Tremor (ET) or Parkinson’s disease (PD), constitutes the most common movement disorder. Stereotactic radiosurgery using Gamma Knife (GK) and linear accelerator (LINAC) systems, is an effective, incisionless treatment modality for ET and PD. Although these technologies have been used clinically since the 1990′s, most studies have focused on GK, and efficacy, safety and time to treatment effect (latency) of GK and LINAC have not been compared.

Objective

We therefore aimed to conduct a systematic review with network meta-analysis examining efficacy, adverse events (AEs) and latency of GK and LINAC for treating tremor in ET and PD.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, using the Embase and PubMed databases. We included all primary GK/LINAC thalamotomy studies in ET/PD patients with at least 6 months of follow-up, reporting unilateral Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Scale (FTM-TRS) or Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale (UPDRS) scores pre-treatment/post-treatment and/or AEs and/or latency. The primary efficacy outcome was FTM-TRS Scale A or UPDRS Item 16 score reduction. AEs were presented as an estimated incidence, and latency as average time to first recorded clinical improvement in tremor.

Results

Six studies of 311 patients and 2 studies of 60 patients met inclusion criteria for GK/LINAC efficacy comparison, respectively. Network meta-analysis showed similar tremor reduction between modalities (standardized mean difference between pre- and post-treatment scores: GK: −2.18 (95 % CI: −2.79, −1.57); LINAC: −2.13 (95 % CI: −5.13, 0.87). GK also had a higher absolute AE rate, while LINAC was associated with a greater latency period. There was no correlation between GK efficacy and AE rate.

Conclusions

Despite the relatively small sample sizes, these results demonstrate similar efficacy between GK and LINAC for ET and PD, with a trend toward higher efficacy but greater AE incidence and slower onset of tremor improvement in GK compared to LINAC.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伽玛刀与直线加速器丘脑切开术治疗原发性震颤和帕金森病:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:震颤,无论是原发性震颤(ET)患者还是帕金森病(PD)患者,都是最常见的运动障碍。使用伽玛刀(GK)和直线加速器(LINAC)系统的立体定向放射手术是治疗ET和PD的一种有效的无切口治疗方式。虽然这些技术自20世纪90年代开始在临床上使用,但大多数研究都集中在GK上,GK和LINAC的疗效、安全性和治疗效果时间(潜伏期)尚未进行比较。目的:因此,我们旨在通过网络荟萃分析进行系统评价,检查GK和LINAC治疗ET和PD震颤的疗效、不良事件(ae)和潜伏期。方法:根据PRISMA指南,使用Embase和PubMed数据库,采用网络荟萃分析进行系统评价。我们纳入了所有随访至少6个月的ET/PD患者的原发性GK/LINAC丘脑切除术研究,报告了治疗前/治疗后和/或ae和/或潜伏期的单侧Fahn-Tolosa-Marin震颤量表(FTM-TRS)或统一帕金森病评定量表(UPDRS)评分。主要疗效指标为FTM-TRS量表A或UPDRS项目16评分降低。ae表示估计发生率,潜伏期表示首次记录震颤临床改善的平均时间。结果:6项研究311例患者和2项研究60例患者分别符合GK/LINAC疗效比较的纳入标准。网络荟萃分析显示,两种治疗方式之间的震颤减少相似(治疗前后评分的标准化平均差异:GK: -2.18 (95% CI: -2.79, -1.57);直线系数:-2.13 (95% ci: -5.13, 0.87)。GK也有较高的AE绝对发生率,而LINAC有较长的潜伏期。GK疗效与AE发生率无相关性。结论:尽管样本量相对较小,但这些结果表明GK和LINAC对ET和PD的疗效相似,与LINAC相比,GK的疗效更高,但AE发生率更高,起病震颤改善更慢。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
402
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: This International journal, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, publishes articles on clinical neurosurgery and neurology and the related neurosciences such as neuro-pathology, neuro-radiology, neuro-ophthalmology and neuro-physiology. The journal has a broad International perspective, and emphasises the advances occurring in Asia, the Pacific Rim region, Europe and North America. The Journal acts as a focus for publication of major clinical and laboratory research, as well as publishing solicited manuscripts on specific subjects from experts, case reports and other information of interest to clinicians working in the clinical neurosciences.
期刊最新文献
Current and future clinical trials for the use of neuromodulation in the treatment of stroke: A review of the clinical Trials.gov database Risk factors for residual dizziness after successful repositioning in elderly patients with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo Clinical and imaging features and treatment response of anti-NMDAR encephalitis combined with MOGAD Validation of the Korean version of the Bad Sobernheim stress Questionnaire-Brace in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis Pure endoscopic presigmoid infralabyrinthine approach for jugular foramen tumors: Operative technique and early results
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1