RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Responsive deep brain stimulation (rDBS) uses physiological signals to deliver stimulation when needed. rDBS is hypothesized to reduce stimulation-induced speech effects associated with continuous DBS (cDBS) in patients with essential tremor (ET). OBJECTIVE: To determine if rDBS reduces cDBS speech-related side effects while maintaining tremor suppression. METHODS: Eight ET participants with thalamic DBS underwent unilateral rDBS. Both speech evaluations and tremor severity were assessed across three conditions (DBS OFF, cDBS ON, and rDBS ON). Speech was analyzed using intelligibility ratings. Tremor severity was scored using the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (TRS). RESULTS: During unilateral cDBS, participants experienced reduced speech intelligibility (P = 0.025) compared to DBS OFF. rDBS was not associated with a deterioration of intelligibility. Both rDBS (P = 0.026) and cDBS (P = 0.038) improved the contralateral TRS score compared to DBS OFF. CONCLUSIONS: rDBS maintained speech intelligibility without loss of tremor suppression. A larger prospective chronic study of rDBS in ET is justified. © 2024 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
RESUMEN
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a common treatment for motor symptoms of Parkinson disease (PD), a condition associated with increased risk of dysphagia. The effect of DBS on swallowing function has not been comprehensively evaluated using gold-standard imaging techniques, particularly for globus pallidus internus (GPi) DBS. The objective of this retrospective, cross-sectional study was to identify differences in swallowing safety and timing kinematics among PD subjects with and without GPi DBS. We investigated the effects of unilateral and bilateral GPi DBS as well as the relationship between swallowing safety and DBS stimulation parameters, using retrospective analysis of videofluoroscopy recordings (71 recordings from 36 subjects) from electronic medical records. Outcomes were analyzed by surgical status (pre-surgical, unilateral DBS, bilateral DBS). The primary outcome was percent of thin-liquid bolus trials rated as unsafe, with Penetration-Aspiration Scale scores of 3 or higher. Secondary analyses included swallowing timing measures, relationships between swallowing safety and DBS stimulation parameters, and Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity ratings. Most subjects swallowed all boluses safely (19/29 in the pre-surgical, 16/26 in the unilateral DBS, and 10/16 in the bilateral DBS conditions). Swallowing safety impairment did not differ among stimulation groups. There was no main effect of stimulation condition on timing metrics, though main effects were found for sex and bolus type. Stimulation parameters were not correlated with swallowing safety. Swallowing efficiency and overall impairment did not differ among conditions. These results provide evidence that GPi DBS does not affect pharyngeal swallowing function. Further, prospective, investigations are needed.
