Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Intrinsic auricular muscle zone stimulation for Parkinson disease: The EARSTIM-PD Phase II multi-center pilot study results.
Fernandez, Hubert H; Macklin, Eric A; Hauser, Robert A; Chou, Kelvin L; Cakmak, Yusuf O; Ozsoy, Burak; Fahn, Stanley.
Afiliação
  • Fernandez HH; Center for Neurological Restoration, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, USA. Electronic address: fernanh@ccf.org.
  • Macklin EA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts General Hospital, USA.
  • Hauser RA; Department of Neurology, University of South Florida School of Medicine, USA.
  • Chou KL; Department of Neurology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, USA.
  • Cakmak YO; Stoparkinson Healthcare Systems, LLC, USA.
  • Ozsoy B; Stoparkinson Healthcare Systems, LLC, USA.
  • Fahn S; Department of Neurology, Columbia University School of Medicine, USA.
Parkinsonism Relat Disord ; 121: 105959, 2024 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38246833
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Studies have suggested that intrinsic auricular muscle zones (IAMZ) stimulation alleviates motor features of Parkinson disease (PD).

METHODS:

A randomized, blinded, active sham-controlled pilot trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and dose-response-time curve of Earstim using a 3-treatment, 3-period crossover design in PD patients experiencing OFF time on levodopa. Treatments were short (20-min) IAMZ stimulation; long (60-min) IAMZ stimulation; and 20-min active sham stimulation of non-muscular areas. Assessment time points were prior to treatment, and 20, 40, 60, 90, and 120 min after treatment onset. Primary safety endpoints were adverse events frequency and severity. Primary efficacy endpoint was the change in MDS-UPDRS motor score at 20 min after treatment onset in the IAMZ treatment groups versus sham.

RESULTS:

Forty-six individuals consented; 38 were randomized (average age 64 years, 65 % male, mean 8.2 years from diagnosis). No serious adverse events or significant device-related events occurred. At 20 min after treatment onset, motor improvements did not differ between IAMZ treatments versus sham. However, at 60 min after treatment onset, motor improvement peaked on IAMZ treatments compared to sham (difference 3.1 [-5.9 to 0.3], p = 0.03). While the difference in 120-min AUC change between IAMZ treatments versus sham was not significant, the short-stimulation IAMZ treatment showed the largest aggregate motor score improvement (AUC = -456 points, 95 % CI -691 to -221) compared to sham.

CONCLUSION:

Earstim was well-tolerated. The greatest motor improvement occurred at 60 min after stimulation onset in the short-stimulation IAMZ treatment, and supports its further study to alleviate OFF periods.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Doença de Parkinson Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Doença de Parkinson Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article