Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery最新文献

Introduction: It is a normal procedure to avoid the application of ionizing radiation during pregnancy. In very rare occasions, treatment can be performed, but doses to the fetus must be evaluated and reported, and the patient must sign informed consent. There can occur two types of damage caused by ionizing radiation - deterministic and stochastic effects. Deterministic effects may occur after reaching a certain threshold (100 mGy for this study); meanwhile, stochastic effects have no limit and their probability rises with dose. This study focuses on deterministic effects.

Case presentations: This study compares the dose measured on phantom for the area of the pelvis and the dose measured on 3 patients with dosimeters positioned on the pelvis irradiated on Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion/Icon. The mean dose for measurement on phantom for the pelvis was 0.73 ± 0.76 mGy, and for the patients, it was 1.28 mGy, 0.493 mGy, and 0.549 mGy which is 80 times lower, 200 times lower, and 180 times lower than the threshold for deterministic effects, respectively.

Conclusion: The measurement carried on phantom served as the base for drafting informed consent and provided initial proof that treatment can be safely delivered. Measurements performed on patients only confirmed that irradiation of pregnant patients on Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion/Icon is safe relative to the deterministic effects. Nevertheless, pregnant patients should be treated with ionizing radiation only in very extraordinary situations.

Introduction: DBS efficacy depends on accuracy. CT-MRI fusion is established for both stereotactic registration and electrode placement verification. The desire to streamline DBS workflows, reduce operative time, and minimize patient transfers has increased interest in portable imaging modalities such as the Medtronic O-arm® and mobile CT. However, these remain expensive and bulky. 3D C-arm fluoroscopy (3DXT) units are a smaller and less costly alternative, albeit incompatible with traditional frame-based localization and without useful soft tissue resolution. We aimed to compare fusion of 3DXT and CT with pre-operative MRI to evaluate if 3DXT-MRI fusion alone is sufficient for accurate registration and reliable targeting verification. We further assess DBS targeting accuracy using a 3DXT workflow and compare radiation dosimetry between modalities.

Methods: Patients underwent robot-assisted DBS implantation using a workflow incorporating 3DXT which we describe. Two intra-operative 3DXT spins were performed for registration and accuracy verification followed by conventional CT post-operatively. Post-operative 3DXT and CT images were independently fused to the same pre-operative MRI sequence and co-ordinates generated for comparison. Registration accuracy was compared to 15 consecutive controls who underwent CT-based registration. Radial targeting accuracy was calculated and radiation dosimetry recorded.

Results: Data were obtained from 29 leads in 15 consecutive patients. 3DXT registration accuracy was significantly superior to CT with mean error 0.22 ± 0.03 mm (p < 0.0001). Mean Euclidean electrode tip position variation for CT to MRI versus 3DXT to MRI fusion was 0.62 ± 0.40 mm (range 0.0 mm-1.7 mm). In comparison, direct CT to 3DXT fusion showed electrode tip Euclidean variance of 0.23 ± 0.09 mm. Mean radial targeting accuracy assessed on 3DXT was 0.97 ± 0.54 mm versus 1.15 ± 0.55 mm on CT with differences insignificant (p = 0.30). Mean patient radiation doses were around 80% lower with 3DXT versus CT (p < 0.0001).

Discussion: Mobile 3D C-arm fluoroscopy can be safely incorporated into DBS workflows for both registration and lead verification. For registration, the limited field of view requires the use of frameless transient fiducials and is highly accurate. For lead position verification based on MRI co-registration, we estimate there is around a 0.4 mm discrepancy between lead position seen on 3DXT versus CT when corrected for brain shift. This is similar to that described in O-arm® or mobile CT series. For units where logistical or financial considerations preclude the acquisition of a cone beam CT or mobile CT scanner, our data support portable 3D C-arm fluoroscopy as an acceptable alternative with significantly lower radiation exposure.

Background: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a highly efficient, evidence-based therapy to alleviate symptoms and improve quality of life in movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, and dystonia, which is also being applied in several psychiatric disorders, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder and depression, when they are otherwise resistant to therapy.

Summary: At present, DBS is clinically applied in the so-called open-loop approach, with fixed stimulation parameters, irrespective of the patients' clinical state(s). This approach ignores the brain states or feedback from the central nervous system or peripheral recordings, thus potentially limiting its efficacy and inducing side effects by stimulation of the targeted networks below or above the therapeutic level.

Key messages: The currently emerging closed-loop (CL) approaches are designed to adapt stimulation parameters to the electrophysiological surrogates of disease symptoms and states. CL-DBS paves the way for adaptive personalized DBS protocols. This review elaborates on the perspectives of the CL technology and discusses its opportunities as well as its potential pitfalls for both clinical and research use in neuropsychiatric disorders.

Introduction: Despite the known benefits of deep brain stimulation (DBS), the cost of the procedure can limit access and can vary widely. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of the reported costs associated with DBS, as well as the variability in reporting cost-associated factors to ultimately increase patient access to this therapy.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature for cost of DBS treatment was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed and Embase databases were queried. Olsen & Associates (OANDA) was used to convert all reported rates to USD. Cost was corrected for inflation using the US Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator, correcting to April 2022.

Results: Twenty-six articles on the cost of DBS surgery from 2001 to 2021 were included. The median number of patients across studies was 193, the mean reported age was 60.5 ± 5.6 years, and median female prevalence was 38.9%. The inflation- and currency-adjusted mean cost of the DBS device was USD 21,496.07 ± USD 8,944.16, the cost of surgery alone was USD 14,685.22 ± USD 8,479.66, the total cost of surgery was USD 40,942.85 ± USD 17,987.43, and the total cost of treatment until 1 year of follow-up was USD 47,632.27 ± USD 23,067.08. There were no differences in costs observed across surgical indication or country.

Conclusion: Our report describes the large variation in DBS costs and the manner of reporting costs. The current lack of standardization impedes productive discourse as comparisons are hindered by both geographic and chronological variations. Emphasis should be put on standardized reporting and analysis of reimbursement costs to better assess the variability of DBS-associated costs in order to make this procedure more cost-effective and address areas for improvement to increase patient access to DBS.

None.

Introduction: With recent advancements in deep brain stimulation (DBS), directional leads featuring segmented contacts have been introduced, allowing for targeted stimulation of specific brain regions. Given that manufacturers employ diverse markers for lead orientation, our investigation focuses on the adaptability of the 2017 techniques proposed by the Cologne research group for lead orientation determination.

Methods: We tailored the two separate 2D and 3D X-ray-based techniques published in 2017 and originally developed for C-shaped markers, to the dual-marker of the Medtronic SenSight™ lead. In a retrospective patient study, we evaluated their feasibility and consistency by comparing the degree of agreement between the two methods.

Results: The Bland-Altman plot showed favorable concordance without any noticeable systematic errors. The mean difference was 0.79°, with limits of agreement spanning from 21.4° to -19.8°. The algorithms demonstrated high reliability, evidenced by an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.99 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The 2D and 3D algorithms, initially formulated for discerning the circular orientation of a C-shaped marker, were adapted to the marker of the Medtronic SenSight™ lead. Statistical analyses revealed a significant level of agreement between the two methods. Our findings highlight the adaptability of these algorithms to different markers, achievable through both low-dose intraoperative 2D X-ray imaging and standard CT imaging.

Introduction: Colloid cysts often occur in the third ventricle, and they are considered benign, slowly growing lesions. They commonly present with symptoms of intracranial hypertension and rarely sudden death due to acute hydrocephalus. The management options include cerebrospinal fluid diversion procedure by shunt, endoscopic or transcranial surgical excision, and stereotactic aspiration. Complications associated with excisional procedures make them undesirable to some patients. Stereotactic radiosurgery has emerged as a noninvasive less risky treatment option. To date, there is no clinical series in the literature reporting on this treatment modality. The aim of the study was to determine the efficacy and safety of gamma knife (GK) radiosurgery in the treatment of third ventricular colloid cysts.

Methods: This is a retrospective study involving 13 patients with third ventricular colloid cysts who underwent GK radiosurgery. GK radiosurgery was used as a primary treatment in all the patients. The median prescription dose was 12 Gy (11-12 Gy). The cyst volumes ranged from 0.2 to 10 cc (median 1.6 cc).

Results: The median follow-up was 50 months (18-108 months). Cyst control was achieved in 100% of the patients. Complete or partial response was observed in 12 patients (92%). Eight patients (62%) had hydrocephalus on imaging at the initial diagnosis. Seven of these patients had VP shunt insertion before GK. One patient required shunt insertion after GK.

Conclusion: GK for third ventricular colloid cysts is a promising treatment, regarding its efficacy and safety, to be added to other treatment options. A longer follow-up is required to confirm long-term control.

Introduction: Recent advancements in stereotactic neurosurgical techniques have become increasingly reliant on image-based target planning. We devised a case-phantom comparative analysis to evaluate the target registration errors arising during the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-computed tomography (CT) image fusion process.

Methods: For subjects whose preoperative MRI and CT images both contained fiducial frame localizers, we investigated discrepancies in target coordinates derived from frame registration based on either MRI or CT. We generated a phantom target through an image fusion process, merging the framed CT images with their corresponding reference MRIs after masking their fiducial indicators. This phantom target was then compared with the original during each instance of target planning.

Results: In our investigative study with 26 frame registrations, a systematic error in the y-axis was observed as -0.89 ± 0.42 mm across cases using either conventional CT and/or cone-beam CT (O-arm). For the z-axis, errors varied on a case-by-case basis, recording at +0.64 ± 1.09 mm with a predominant occurrence in those merged with cone-beam CT. Collectively, these errors resulted in an average Euclidean error of 1.33 ± 0.93 mm.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the accuracy of frame-based stereotactic planning is potentially compromised during MRI-CT fusion process. Practitioners should recognize this issue, underscoring a pressing need for strategies and advancements to optimize the process.