Search

Three neuromodulation therapies, all using implanted device and electrodes, have been approved to treat adults with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, namely, the vagus nerve stimulation in 1995, deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT-DBS) in 2018 (2010 in Europe), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) in 2014. Indications for VNS have more recently extended to children down to age of 4. Limited or anecdotal data are available in other epilepsy syndromes and refractory/super-refractory status epilepticus. Overall, neuromodulation therapies are palliative, with only a minority of patients achieving long-term seizure freedom, justifying favoring such treatments in patients who are not good candidates for curative epilepsy surgery. About half of patients implanted with VNS, ANT-DBS, and RNS have 50% or greater reduction in seizures, with long-term data suggesting increased efficacy over time. Besides their impact on seizure frequency, neuromodulation therapies are associated with various benefits and drawbacks in comparison to antiseizure drugs. Yet, we lack high-level evidence to best position each neuromodulation therapy in the treatment pathways of persons with difficult-to-treat epilepsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A significant amount of European basic and clinical neuroscience research includes the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and low intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), mainly transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Two recent changes in the EU regulations, the introduction of the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) (2017/745) and the Annex XVI have caused significant problems and confusions in the brain stimulation field. The negative consequences of the MDR for non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) have been largely overlooked and until today, have not been consequently addressed by National Competent Authorities, local ethical committees, politicians and by the scientific communities. In addition, a rushed bureaucratic decision led to seemingly wrong classification of NIBS products without an intended medical purpose into the same risk group III as invasive stimulators. Overregulation is detrimental for any research and for future developments, therefore researchers, clinicians, industry, patient representatives and an ethicist were invited to contribute to this document with the aim of starting a constructive dialogue and enacting positive changes in the regulatory environment., (Copyright © 2024 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Neurostimulation as a treatment for epilepsy has been around for almost 20 years in the form of vagus nerve stimulation. Newer types of neurostimulation are being developed and stand on the brink of approval for use. The two newest therapies, not yet approved in the United States, are deep brain stimulation and the Responsive Neurostimulator System . In fact, in Europe, approval has already been given for deep brain stimulation and newer forms of vagus nerve stimulation. Efficacy is similar between these therapies, and side effects are moderate, so what will be the future? The challenge will be to learn how to use these therapies correctly and offer the right treatment for the right patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ten years ago deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been introduced as an alternative and promising treatment option for patients suffering from severe Tourette syndrome (TS). It seemed timely to develop a European guideline on DBS by a working group of the European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome (ESSTS). For a narrative review a systematic literature search was conducted and expert opinions of the guidelines group contributed also to the suggestions. Of 63 patients reported so far in the literature 59 had a beneficial outcome following DBS with moderate to marked tic improvement. However, randomized controlled studies including a larger number of patients are still lacking. Although persistent serious adverse effects (AEs) have hardly been reported, surgery-related (e.g., bleeding, infection) as well as stimulation-related AEs (e.g., sedation, anxiety, altered mood, changes in sexual function) may occur. At present time, DBS in TS is still in its infancy. Due to both different legality and practical facilities in different European countries these guidelines, therefore, have to be understood as recommendations of experts. However, among the ESSTS working group on DBS in TS there is general agreement that, at present time, DBS should only be used in adult, treatment resistant, and severely affected patients. It is highly recommended to perform DBS in the context of controlled trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deep brain stimulation is a neurosurgical therapy for patients with advanced movement disorders (e.g., Parkinson's disease). This therapy involves the use of a patient controller for home-use. So far, there are four different patient controllers available on the European market. However, use and acceptance of the patient controller is relatively low. The main end-user group is patients above the age of 60 years. This article compares the design of the different interfaces, with a special focus on gerotechnological aspects (display, acoustic signals, coloring, lettering, cognitive load and haptics). We suggest strategies to optimize the use and acceptance of these devices, which have already entered the market. Moreover, future directions of deep brain stimulation and the usability of patient controllers are discussed. INSET: Key issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psychiatric neurosurgery, specifically stereotactic ablation, has continued since the 1940s, mainly at a few centers in Europe and the US. Since the late 1990s, the resurgence of interest in this field has been remarkable; reports of both lesion procedures and the newer technique of deep brain stimulation (DBS) have increased rapidly. In early 2009, the US FDA granted limited humanitarian approval for DBS for otherwise intractable obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), the first such approval for a psychiatric illness. Several factors explain the emergence of DBS and continued small-scale use of refined lesion procedures. DBS and stereotactic ablation have been successful and widely used for movement disorders. There remains an unmet clinical need: current drug and behavioral treatments offer limited benefit to some seriously ill people. Understandings of the neurocircuitry underlying psychopathology and the response to treatment, while still works in progress, are much enhanced. Here, we review modern lesion procedures and DBS for OCD in the context of neurocircuitry. A key issue is that clinical benefit can be obtained after surgeries targeting different brain structures. This fits well with anatomical models, in which circuits connecting orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), basal ganglia, and thalamus are central to OCD pathophysiology and treatment response. As in movement disorders, dedicated interdisciplinary teams, here led by psychiatrists, are required to implement these procedures and maintain care for patients so treated. Available data, although limited, support the promise of stereotactic ablation or DBS in carefully selected patients. Benefit in such cases appears not to be confined to obsessions and compulsions, but includes changes in affective state. Caution is imperative, and key issues in long-term management of psychiatric neurosurgery patients deserve focused attention. DBS and contemporary ablation also present different patterns of potential benefits and burdens. Translational research to elucidate how targeting specific nodes in putative OCD circuitry might lead to therapeutic gains is accelerating in tandem with clinical use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides information on the "Deep Brain Stimulation for Disorders of Mood, Behavior and Thought: Scientific and Ethical Issues" conference sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and Dana Foundation in 2007. The conference examines the scientific and ethical issues in the application of deep brain stimulation for treating mood and behavioral disorders. Moreover, it features leading clinical investigators from different centers in the U.S. and Europe.

Cervical dystonia, which is the most common form of focal dystonia, presents with sustained neck spasms, abnormal head posture, head tremor, and pain. One of the interesting and unique features of cervical dystonia is the geste antagoniste. There is not a well-described pathophysiology for cervical dystonia, but several hypotheses report involvement at the central and peripheral level. Treatment options include: oral medical therapy, botulinum toxin injection, and surgery. Oral medical therapy has limited efficacy in control of the symptoms of cervical dystonia. Two types of botulinum toxin, types A and B, are being used for treatment of cervical dystonia, with equivalent benefit. Surgery is an option when other treatments fail or become ineffective. The surgical procedures are brain lesioning, brain stimulation, and peripheral surgical intervention. Several trials are currently ongoing in the United States and Europe to evaluate the efficacy of deep brain surgery in cervical dystonia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the past years substanial knowledge has been obtained both in diagnostics and pharmacotherapy of unipolar depression. Today it is well-established that perturbation of the monoaminergic neurotransmission pathway is implicated in the development of depressive states, and that all currently existing antidepressants act on depressive symptoms by controlling monoamine availability at the synaptic level. According to the data obtained in Europe, it is apparent that these treatments are efficient in only 60–70% of depressed patients and their onset of action is partly delayed by 4–5 weeks. With novel pharmacological approaches recently being introduced, these figures can be improved. With the introduction of agomelatine, for instance, which affects the melatonergic as well as serotonergic pathways, higher response rates than with conventional antidepressants have been demonstrated. Furthermore, treatment of therapy resistance has been advanced with the introduction of atypical antipsychotics. For treatment refractory patients, brain stimulation as well as vagus nerve stimulation showed promising results although the later two methods are only possible in specific treatment centers. The advances in pharmacogenomics and sequencing of the human genome promise for the future to have molecular targets which have not as yet reached the daily practice. The search for new antidepressants based on these considerations has not been completed and the recent findings are promising for the future in regards to research and treatment. The lecture will include data on the neuropsychopharmacological understanding furthermore the future perspectives of treatment approaches will be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]