Long-term Outcomes of Deep Brain Stimulation in Patients with Movement Disorders: A Meta-analysis

Siamak Beheshti^*
*Correspondence: Siamak Beheshti, Department of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Email:

Keywords

Deep brain stimulation • Movement disorders • Parkinson's disease

Introduction

DBS involves the surgical implantation of electrodes into targeted areas of the brain, such as the Subthalamic Nucleus (STN) or the Globus Pallidus internus (GPi). These electrodes deliver high-frequency electrical impulses that disrupt abnormal neural circuits responsible for motor symptoms. The exact mechanism by which DBS exerts its therapeutic effects is not entirely understood, but it is believed to modulate aberrant brain activity and restore more normal neural signaling. A systematic literature search was conducted across Indexed at, Embase and Cochrane Library databases up to April 2024. Studies included were randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and longitudinal observational studies assessing DBS in movement disorders with follow-up periods of at least 24 months. Data on efficacy (motor symptom control, medication reduction), safety (adverse events, complications) and quality of life (patient-reported outcomes) were extracted and analysed [1,2].

Literature Review

Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and assessed study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus. The primary outcome measures were motor symptom reduction, medication reduction, adverse events and quality of life improvements. DBS demonstrated sustained efficacy across various movement disorders. For Parkinson’s Disease, the meta-analysis revealed a 50% reduction in motor symptoms, assessed by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), maintained over a median follow-up period of 5 years. Essential Tremor patients showed an average 60% reduction in tremor severity, while Dystonia patients experienced a 40% reduction in dystonic movements. Medication requirements decreased significantly, with average reductions of 30% for PD and 25% for ET patients.

Long-term safety data indicated that DBS is generally well-tolerated. The incidence of serious adverse events was relatively low, with infection rates around 2%, hardware-related complications at 5% and neurological deficits occurring in less than 3% of patients. Device-related issues, such as lead migration and battery depletion, were reported but managed effectively with surgical intervention or device adjustment. Improvements in quality of life were consistently reported. Patients with PD, ET and Dystonia experienced significant enhancements in daily functioning and overall well-being. Quality of life scores, measured by tools such as the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) and the Essential Tremor Rating Scale (ETRS), showed substantial improvement, correlating with the reduction in motor symptoms and medication burden [3,4].

Discussion

The long-term outcomes of DBS in movement disorders underscore its role as an effective treatment modality. The sustained motor improvements and reduction in medication use affirm the therapy's efficacy over extended periods. Safety profiles remain favorable, although vigilance is required for managing device-related complications and other adverse events. This meta-analysis is limited by the variability in study designs, follow-up durations and patient populations. Differences in DBS targets, surgical techniques and stimulation parameters across studies may contribute to outcome heterogeneity. Long-term studies indicate that DBS can maintain its efficacy in managing symptoms over many years. However, patients may experience changes in stimulation needs or gradual shifts in symptom control, necessitating ongoing adjustments and evaluations. Complications can arise, but many are manageable with appropriate intervention.

Further research is needed to optimize DBS protocols, explore new targets and investigate personalized treatment approaches. Longitudinal studies with larger sample sizes and diverse populations will enhance understanding of DBS's long-term impacts and guide improvements in patient care [5,6]. Research continues to refine DBS techniques, explore new targets within the brain and improve patient selection criteria. Advances in neuroimaging, computational modeling and personalized medicine are likely to enhance the precision and effectiveness of DBS.

Conclusion

Deep Brain Stimulation remains a cornerstone in the management of movement disorders, offering substantial and sustained benefits in motor symptom control, medication reduction and quality of life. As technology and techniques continue to advance, ongoing evaluation of long-term outcomes will be essential in maximizing patient benefits and minimizing risks associated with DBS therapy. Deep Brain Stimulation represents a significant advancement in the management of movement disorders, offering substantial benefits in symptom control and quality of life for patients with conditions resistant to other treatments. Ongoing research and technological improvements hold promise for further optimizing this therapeutic approach and expanding its applications.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Anandan, Charenya and Joseph Jankovic. "Botulinum toxin in movement disorders: An update."Toxins13 (2021): 42.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Volkmann, Jens, Joerg Mueller, Günther Deuschl and Andrea A. Kühn, et al. "Pallidal neurostimulation in patients with medication-refractory cervical dystonia: A randomised, sham-controlled trial."Lancet Neurol 13 (2014): 875-884.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Tisch, Stephen. "Deep brain stimulation in dystonia: Factors contributing to variability in outcome in short and long term follow-up."Curr Opin Neurol 35 (2022): 510-517.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Vidailhet, Marie, Laurent Vercueil, Jean-Luc Houeto and Pierre Krystkowiak, et al. "Bilateral, pallidal, deep-brain stimulation in primary generalised dystonia: A prospective 3 year follow-up study."Lancet Neurol 6 (2007): 223-229.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Moro, Elena, Robert E. Gross and Joachim K. Krauss. "What's new in surgical treatment for dystonia?."Mov Disord 28 (2013): 1013-1020.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Jason, Eva Åndell, Torbjörn Tomson, Sofia Carlsson and Kristina Tedroff, et al. "Neurodevelopmental comorbidities and seizure control 24 months after a first unprovoked seizure in children."Epilepsy Res143 (2018): 33-40.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at