Intraoperative Local Field Potential Beta Power and Three-Dimensional Neuroimaging Mapping Predict Long-Term Clinical Response to Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson Disease: A Retrospective Study
Lazzaro di Biase,Carla Piano,Francesco Bove,Lorenzo Ricci,Maria Letizia Caminiti,Alessandro Stefani,Fabio Viselli,Nicola Modugno,Rocco Cerroni,Paolo Calabresi,Anna Rita Bentivoglio,Tommaso Tufo,Vincenzo Di Lazzaro,Lazio DBS Study Group,Maria Concetta Altavista,Livia Brusa,Marco Ciavarro,Francesca Cortese,Manuela D'Ercole,Maria Francesca De Pandis,Daniela Di Giuda,Giovanni Fabbrini,Alessandro Izzo,Rosa Liperoti,Giuseppe Marano,Massimo Marano,Michela Orsini,Michele Paradiso,Antonella Peppe,Mariangela Pierantozzi,Camilla Rocchi,Antonio Suppa,Rita Vadalà,Laura Vacca,Antonio Daniele
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurom.2022.12.013
Neuromodulation
Abstract:Background: Directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) leads allow a fine-tuning control of the stimulation field, however, this new technology could increase the DBS programming time because of the higher number of the possible combinations used in directional DBS than in standard nondirectional electrodes. Neuroimaging leads localization techniques and local field potentials (LFPs) recorded from DBS electrodes implanted in basal ganglia are among the most studied biomarkers for DBS programing. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether intraoperative LFPs beta power and neuroimaging reconstructions correlate with contact selection in clinical programming of DBS in patients with Parkinson disease (PD). Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, routine intraoperative LFPs recorded from all contacts in the subthalamic nucleus (STN) of 14 patients with PD were analyzed to calculate the beta band power for each contact. Neuroimaging reconstruction obtained through Brainlab Elements Planning software detected contacts localized within the STN. Clinical DBS programming contact scheme data were collected after one year from the implant. Statistical analysis evaluated the diagnostic performance of LFPs beta band power and neuroimaging data for identification of the contacts selected with clinical programming. We evaluated whether the most effective contacts identified based on the clinical response after one year from implant were also those with the highest level of beta activity and localized within the STN in neuroimaging reconstruction. Results: LFPs beta power showed a sensitivity of 67%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 84%, a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 2.7 in predicting the most effective contacts as evaluated through the clinical response. Neuroimaging reconstructions showed a sensitivity of 62%, a NPV of 77%, a DOR of 1.20 for contact effectivity prediction. The combined use of the two methods showed a sensitivity of 87%, a NPV of 87%, a DOR of 2.7 for predicting the clinically more effective contacts. Conclusions: The combined use of LFPs beta power and neuroimaging localization and segmentations predict which are the most effective contacts as selected on the basis of clinical programming after one year from implant of DBS. The use of predictors in contact selection could guide clinical programming and reduce time needed for it.