1. Optimized Propofol Anesthesia Increases Power of Subthalamic Neuronal Activity in Patients with Parkinson's Disease Undergoing Deep Brain Stimulation
- Author
-
Nan Jiang, Qian-Qian Guo, Xing-Yi Jin, Chao Yang, Zhiguo Zhang, Chang-Ming Zhang, Ling Chen, Bin Wu, Li-Nan Zhang, Wenbiao Xian, Yuting Ling, Yi Liu, and Jin-Long Liu
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Parkinson's disease ,Neurology ,Deep brain stimulation ,medicine.medical_treatment ,General anesthesia ,Microelectrode recording ,Subthalamic nucleus ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,medicine ,Premovement neuronal activity ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Propofol ,Original Research ,business.industry ,medicine.disease ,nervous system diseases ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,nervous system ,Scalp ,Anesthesia ,Anesthetic ,Parkinson’s disease ,Neurology (clinical) ,business ,030217 neurology & neurosurgery ,medicine.drug - Abstract
Introduction Propofol is a general anesthetic option for deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). However, its effects on STN activity and neuropsychological outcomes are controversial. The optimal propofol anesthesia for asleep DBS is unknown. This study investigated the safety and effectiveness of an optimized propofol anesthesia regimen in asleep DBS. Methods This retrospective study enrolled 68 PD patients undergoing bilateral STN-DBS surgery. All patients received local scalp anesthesia, with (asleep group, n = 35) or without (awake group, n = 33) propofol-remifentanil general anesthesia by target-controlled infusion under electroencephalogram monitoring. The primary outcome was subthalamic neuronal spiking characterization during microelectrode recording. The secondary outcomes were clinical outcomes including motor, cognition, mind, sleep, and quality of life at 6 months. Results Significantly increased delta and theta power were obtained under propofol anesthesia (awake vs. asleep group, mean ± standard deviation; delta: 31.97 ± 9.87 vs. 39.77 ± 10.56, p
- Published
- 2021