You are in: eMedicine Specialties > Neurology > Movement and Neurodegenerative Diseases Surgical Treatment of Parkinson DiseaseArticle Last Updated: Aug 7, 2006AUTHOR AND EDITOR INFORMATIONAuthor: Michele Tagliati, MD, Division Chief of Movement Disorders, Associate Professor, Department of Neurology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine Michele Tagliati is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Neurology, American Medical Association, and Movement Disorders Society Coauthor(s): Ron L Alterman, MD, Associate Professor of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Consulting Surgeon, Department of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Elmhurst Hospital, and Walter Reed Army Medical Center; Jay Shils, PhD, Director of Intraoperative Monitoring, Assistant Professor of Neurosurgery, Neurosurgery, Lahey Clinic Editors: Robert A Hauser, MD, Professor, Departments of Neurology, Pharmacology, and Experimental Therapeutics, Director, Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders Center, University of South Florida and Tampa General Healthcare; Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine; Nestor Galvez-Jimenez, MD, Program Director of Movement Disorders, Department of Neurology, Division of Medicine, Director of Neurology Residency Training Program, Cleveland Clinic Florida; Selim R Benbadis, MD, Professor, Director of Comprehensive Epilepsy Program, Departments of Neurology and Neurosurgery, University of South Florida School of Medicine, Tampa General Hospital; Nicholas Y Lorenzo, MD, Chief Editor, eMedicine Neurology; Consulting Staff, Neurology Specialists and Consultants Author and Editor Disclosure Synonyms and related keywords: surgical treatment of Parkinson disease, Parkinson disease, PD, Parkinson's disease, Parkinson disease surgery, movement disorder surgery INTRODUCTIONBackground Surgical approaches to the treatment of Parkinson disease (PD) have developed primarily in response to the failure of medical therapies to provide long-term relief from the disabling motor symptoms of the disease. The introduction of levodopa (L-DOPA) in the mid-1960s, an event that revolutionized the medical management of PD, sets the focal point around which the history of movement disorder surgery may be examined. Before the advent of L-DOPA therapy, a combination of factors, including the absence of effective medical therapies, the introduction of human stereotaxis, the large population of patients with postencephalitic parkinsonism, and a more permissive environment, promoted the development of neurosurgical approaches to PD and related disorders. Many of the surgeries for movement disorders performed today were introduced during this period. With the advent of L-DOPA in the late 1960s and its remarkable effectiveness against most symptoms of PD, surgical treatments were abandoned except in rare situations when tremor was medically unresponsive. Over time, however, waning of the response to L-DOPA and unexplained side effects of long-term treatment became apparent. The relative failure of L-DOPA to provide a lifelong cure for PD coincided with advances in stereotactic technique that resulted in a renaissance of the field of movement disorder surgery. Many factors contributed to this rebirth, including the following:
The discovery of 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP), a selective neurotoxin that destroys the dopaminergic cells of the substantia nigra pars compacta (the same cells that degenerate in PD), led to the development of primate models of PD. A more detailed model of the basal ganglia circuitry was produced by the seminal studies in MPTP-treated monkeys, which develop a parkinsonian syndrome. Although incomplete, this functional model has contributed significantly to the rebirth of movement disorders surgery. The basic structure of the circuit is demonstrated in Image 1 and described briefly in the following:
Patient Education For excellent patient education resources, visit eMedicine's Dementia Center. Also, see eMedicine's patient education article Parkinson Disease. PREOPERATIVE EVALUATIONGood surgical outcomes begin with careful patient selection and end with attentive, detail-oriented postoperative care. The authors believe that this level of care is best provided by a multidisciplinary team comprising a movement disorder neurologist, a neurosurgeon who is well-versed in stereotactic technique, a neurophysiologist, a psychiatrist, and a neuropsychologist. Additional support from neuroradiology and rehabilitation medicine is essential. At the authors' movement disorder center, patients are evaluated for surgery as follows:
SURGICAL TECHNIQUEDuring stereotactic surgery, imaging data are correlated to 3-dimensional space, permitting a target deep within the brain to be reached blindly and with minimal trauma. Frame-based techniques are dependent upon the application to the skull of a reference coordinate system, permitting any point within the brain to be described with Cartesian (ie, x, y, z) coordinates.
SURGICAL PROCEDURESUntil recently, surgery for movement disorders involved predominantly destructive lesioning of abnormally hyperactive deep brain nuclei; however, the observation that high-frequency electrostimulation in the VL thalamus eliminates tremors in patients undergoing thalamotomy led to investigation of long-term DBS as a reversible alternative to lesioning procedures. Continued refinement of the knowledge of basal ganglia circuitry and PD pathophysiology has narrowed the focus of movement disorder surgery to 3 key gray matter structures: (1) the thalamus, (2) the globus pallidus, and (3) the subthalamic nucleus. Neuroablative proceduresDuring neuroablation, a specific deep brain target is destroyed by thermocoagulation. A radiofrequency generator is used most commonly to heat the lesioning electrode tip to the prescribed temperature in a controlled fashion. The 2 most commonly performed neuroablative procedures are thalamotomy and pallidotomy, in which lesions are created in the VL thalamus and the GPi, respectively. Ventrolateral thalamotomy VL thalamotomy was the most frequently performed procedure for movement disorders in the pre-levodopa era because tremor responds best to thalamotomy and can be monitored more easily in the operating room than gait abnormalities, rigidity, and akinesia. Physiological rationale: VL thalamus receives afferent innervation from 2 primary sources: the GPi via the ansa lenticularis and thalamic fasciculus and the contralateral cerebellum via the superior cerebellar peduncle. These cerebellar fibers synapse primarily in the ventral intermediate (VIM) and ventral oral posterior (VOP) nuclei, the most posterior segments of the VL. Oscillating excitatory input from the cerebellum may be responsible for the tremor observed in PD, as cellular activity synchronous with the frequency of PD tremor can be recorded in VL. These data support the clinical observation that lesions placed within VL (and specifically within VIM/VOP) arrest parkinsonian and essential tremors. Indication: Thalamotomy is indicated in patients with PD who are disabled by medically refractory tremor. The anticipated benefit of tremor reduction or elimination must be considered carefully. Rest tremor alone is rarely disabling, and bradykinesia and rigidity can reduce dexterity irrespective of tremor. Target and results: VIM almost unanimously is considered the best target for tremor suppression, with excellent short-term and long-term results in 80-90% of patients with PD. Rigidity and akinesia are improved less significantly. When these symptoms are prominent, other targets, including GPi and STN, are preferred. Morbidity and mortality: The reported morbidity rate for thalamotomy ranges from 9-23%. The predominant complication is speech impairment with dysarthria and hypophonia. The risk of speech abnormalities is 30% for unilateral thalamotomy and greater than 60% following bilateral lesions. Other complications include memory loss, contralateral hemiparesis, and, more rarely, hemineglect, dystonia, hemiballismus, athetosis, and dyspraxia. Preoperative memory and language evaluation can predict patients who are at greatest risk for postoperative cognitive and language dysfunction. In the largest series, the mortality rate for thalamotomy ranges from 0.5-1%. Death results almost exclusively from intraparenchymal hemorrhage. Svenillson and Leksell described ventral posterior pallidotomy in the 1960s; however, their report was largely overlooked. In 1992, Laitinen et al reported improved tremor, rigidity, akinesia, and LID in 38 patients treated with pallidotomy, prompting a reappraisal of the procedure performed with more modern techniques. Rationale: The negative symptoms of PD (ie, rigidity, bradykinesia) are caused, in part, by excessive inhibitory output from the GPi to the VL thalamus (see Pathophysiology in Introduction). Lesioning of the sensorimotor region of the GPi, which lies ventral and posterior in the nucleus, decreases this hyperinhibition of motor thalamus. Indications: Pallidotomy improves the symptoms of PD, including rigidity, bradykinesia, and gait abnormalities, as well as the long-term complications of L-DOPA therapy (ie, dyskinesia and off-state dystonia). Tremor improvement is less consistent than with thalamotomy. Targets and results: The original pallidotomy target was in the medial and anterodorsal part of the nucleus. This so-called "medial pallidotomy" effectively relieved rigidity but inconsistently improved tremor. Leksell subsequently moved the target to the posteroventral and lateral GPi, resulting in sustained improvement in as many as 96% of patients. Morbidity and mortality: The most serious and frequent (3.6%) adverse effect of pallidotomy is a scotoma in the contralateral lower-central visual field. This complication occurs when the GPi lesion extends into the optic tract, which lies immediately below the GPi. The risk of visual field deficit is reduced greatly by accurate delineation of the ventral GPi border by MER. Less frequent complications (<5%) include injury to the internal capsule, facial paresis, and intracerebral hemorrhage (1-2%). As with bilateral thalamotomy, abnormalities of speech, swallowing, and cognition can be observed after bilateral pallidotomy. Subthalamotomy Hyperactivity of the excitatory STN projections to the GPi is a crucial physiologic feature of PD. Although lesioning the STN usually has been avoided out of concern of producing hemiballismus, recent results obtained by experimental lesions of the STN in animals and humans suggest that subthalamotomy may be performed safely and may reverse parkinsonism dramatically. DEEP BRAIN STIMULATIONIntroductionDeep brain stimulation (DBS) was first used in the 1970s for the treatment of chronic pain. Mixed results and poor electrode design caused a cessation of significant activity in this field in the 1980s, but over the last 15 years, DBS has reemerged as one of the most effective treatments for advanced movement disorders. Mechanism of action Currently, no explanation clearly describes the mechanism of action of DBS, although several hypotheses have been formulated. High-frequency stimulation may create a global hyperpolarization of the cell membrane, resulting in a loss of excitability. Alternatively, stimulation may "jam" signal flow out of an abnormally functioning structure. Antidromic and orthodromic depolarization currents may modulate neuronal activity at sites distant from the stimulation target. Finally, stimulation-induced disruption of pathological network activity has been proposed to explain DBS effects on abnormal movement disorders (McIntyre, 2004). Advantages The main advantages of DBS are reversibility and adjustability. Because the DBS lead is left in place, physicians have ongoing access to the target site, allowing them to adjust stimulation parameters in response to changes in the patient's condition. If stimulation induces unwanted adverse effects, the stimulator can be turned off, adjusted, or removed. In the event that DBS proves clinically ineffective, the patient has not suffered an irreversible lesion to the brain. Additional advantages include the ability to intervene at targets that cannot or should not be lesioned and the provision of a unique opportunity to study human basal ganglia physiology. Disadvantages The main disadvantage of DBS is the cost. Currently, the cost of the device is approximately $10,000 per unit. Additional disadvantages include an increased risk of infection due to the presence of implanted hardware and the cost of maintenance (ie, repair/replacement of fractured wires, repeated office visits for stimulation adjustments). Currently, battery exhaustion necessitates replacement of the entire pulse generator, the most expensive component of the system (cost is approximately $8,000) every few years. Procedure DBS implantation is performed in 2 stages. During the first stage, the DBS lead is implanted stereotactically into the target nucleus. During the second stage, the DBS lead is connected subcutaneously to an implantable pulse generator (IPG), which is inserted into a pocket beneath the skin of the chest wall, like a pacemaker (see Image 4). As with most stereotactic movement disorder procedures, the first stage is performed with the patient awake to allow monitoring of neurologic status. The stereotactic headframe (see Image 5) is applied on the morning of surgery and a targeting MRI is performed (see Image 6). A combination of MER and macroelectrode stimulation is used to refine the desired target physiologically. The DBS lead is implanted (see A brain MRI is obtained immediately postoperatively to confirm proper electrode placement and to make sure that no hemorrhage has occurred (see Image 8). If the MRI is acceptable, the patient is returned to the operating room, where the remainder of the device is implanted under general anesthesia. The electrode is thin (approximately 1.3 mm in diameter) and flexible, so that it atraumatically moves with the brain. The device can be programmed to deliver stimulation in monopolar or bipolar fashion, employing any of the 4 electrode contacts, alone or in combination (see Image 9). Thus, a great deal of therapeutic flexibility is provided, permitting customized stimulation for each patient. Following proper patient selection and accurate lead location, competent programming of the implanted device is essential to optimized DBS therapy. After approximately 2 weeks, therapeutic electrical parameters can be set using a transcutaneous programmer (see Image 10). The primary goals of DBS programming are to maximize symptom suppression and minimize adverse effects. Minimizing battery drain is a significant secondary goal. In order to achieve these goals, a systematic, multistep approach is recommended (Krack, 2002). Stimulation can be delivered in monopolar or bipolar fashion, using any of 4 electrode contacts, alone or in combination. Thus, a great deal of therapeutic flexibility is provided, permitting customized stimulation for each patient. Moreover, stimulation parameters can be adjusted at any time if needed. Thalamic DBSThalamic DBS initially was used contralateral to previous thalamotomies to reduce the risk associated with bilateral thalamotomy. However, the results were so encouraging that thalamic DBS has become not only an accepted alternative to thalamotomy, but it is currently the procedure of choice for patients who require unilateral or bilateral procedures for medically refractory tremor. A decade of experience in Europe and the United States indicates that thalamic DBS is equivalent to thalamotomy for tremor suppression. The Multicentre European study of thalamic stimulation in parkinsonian and essential tremor reported rates of significant improvement between 85% for PD tremor and 89% for ET at 12 months (Limousin, 1999). In most patients, the very good results with stimulation seen at 1 year were maintained after more than 6 years (Sydow, 2003). As with thalamotomy, thalamic DBS uncommonly provides significant functional improvement for patients with PD because their rest tremor is not usually a source of functional disability. In fact, nowadays, thalamic DBS is rarely—if ever—offered to patients with PD. Because the lesion is eliminated, hemorrhage rates and cognitive adverse effects may prove less frequent than with thalamotomy. Side effects related to stimulation, including paresthesia, dysarthria, and gait disorders are relatively common though reversible by setting adjustments. Device-related complications, including end of battery life, skin erosion, or infection can be observed and resolved in most cases. The promising results initially achieved in the thalamus prompted the application of DBS to other key targets for the treatment of PD. Pallidal DBSSiegfrid and Lippitz introduced bilateral pallidal (ie, GPi) stimulation in 1994, reporting improvements in rigidity, akinesia, and LID in 4 patients. Twelve years later, GPi DBS has received much less attention than the comparable procedure in the STN, although the best overall target for PD remains controversial (Okun, 2005). Recently, a comparative study by Anderson et al (2005) showed no significant differences in the overall benefits of DBS at these 2 sites. Benefits ranging from 37-39% in the "off-medicine" Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), a widely accepted rating scale of PD signs, motor subscore at 1 year have been reported (Burchiel, 1999; DBS Study group, 2001; Anderson, 2005). Dyskinesia improves dramatically and GPi DBS has also been effective in decreasing off time and improving motor fluctuations. The effect on tremor is less dramatic, and significant medication reduction is usually not achieved with GPi DBS. On the other hand, cognitive and behavioral adverse effects seem to be less frequent. Stimulator programming in the pallidum is more challenging than in the thalamus. Higher stimulation voltages may exacerbate freezing, nullifying the therapeutic effects of L-DOPA. Moreover, stimulation in different regions of the pallidum may have strikingly different effects. Dorsal GPi stimulation has been reported to improve akinesia and rigidity but may result in abnormal involuntary movements (ie, dyskinesias). In contrast, ventral GPi stimulation can exacerbate akinesia and gait abnormalities but improves rigidity and LID. Subthalamic DBSWhile select patients with PD derive significant benefit from neuroablation or stimulation at VIM and/or GPi, in most instances akinesia (ie, freezing) and gait abnormalities are not improved significantly. Unfortunately, these symptoms are commonly the most disabling features of advancing PD. Consequently, a great deal of attention has been paid to a new procedure—bilateral electrostimulation of the subthalamic nucleus. Rationale Hyperactivity of the excitatory pathway from STN to GPi is considered a key pathophysiological hallmark of PD, a fact that is supported by the observation that lesioning the STN in primates with MPTP reverses their parkinsonism. Indications Unilateral or bilateral STN stimulation is indicated in patients with advanced idiopathic PD who are still responsive to levodopa but suffer from severe fluctuations in medication response, tremor, rigidity, and/or akinesia in the off state (ie, when medications are not working) and LID in the on state. Results DBS of the subthalamic nucleus, like that of the GPi, improves all the cardinal motor symptoms of PD. As already noted, STN DBS is generally performed more commonly than GPi DBS. Studies of STN DBS have consistently reported remarkable improvement, ranging from 45–to-70% in the off-medicine motor subscore of the UPDRS. Improvement is usually stable at least up to 5 years, with continued efficacy and a 54% benefit in the "off" motor score in one study. "On" time is also significantly increased from 27% of the day at baseline to 74% at 3 months. Bilateral STN stimulation may produce dramatic beneficial effects on midline symptoms such as gait, posture, and balance. Dosage and frequency of antiparkinsonian drugs can be substantially decreased with STN DBS, which can have an additive effect to LID. In some cases, patients may experience severe dyskinesias necessitating the reduction of dopamimetic medications. While some groups significantly decrease drugs immediately after surgery, the authors prefer to act more conservatively, as many patients do not tolerate this and may experience significant mood abnormalities, in particular apathy and depression. Complications Adverse events of STN DBS can be classified into 3 main groups:
Is subthalamic nucleus stimulation neuroprotective?STN stimulation has been hypothesized to be neuroprotective, slowing down the progression of PD. The STN provides excitatory (glutamatergic) output to the GPi, the substantia nigra pars reticulata (SNr), the pedunculopontine nucleus, and the dopaminergic neurons in the SNc. Therefore, STN hyperactivity caused by loss of dopaminergic input to the striatum (see Pathophysiology in Introduction) may, in turn, produce excitotoxic damage to the dopaminergic neurons to which they project, resulting in further neuronal loss in the SNc. Thus, pharmacologic or surgical therapies that reduce STN neuronal hyperactivity may be neuroprotective to the dopaminergic neurons of the SNc, possibly slowing or halting the progression of PD. Further studies are required to evaluate this hypothesis. SELECTION OF THE PROPER PROCEDUREPresently, surgery is reserved for patients with medically refractory PD with disabling problems. Currently, the authors' center adopts the following surgical recommendations for patients with medically refractory PD:
OTHER SURGICAL OPTIONSCell transplantation is an option.
MULTIMEDIA
REFERENCES
Surgical Treatment of Parkinson Disease excerpt Article Last Updated: Aug 7, 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||