Long-Term Outcome and Neuroimaging of Deep Brain Stimulation in Holmes Tremor: A Case Series

BackgroundDifferent deep brain stimulation (DBS) targets have been suggested as treatment for patients with pharmacologically refractory Holmes tremor (HT). We report the clinical and quality of life (QoL) long-term (up to nine years) outcome in four patients with HT treated with DBS (in thalamic ventral intermediate nucleus-VIM or in dentato-rubro-thalamic tract-DRTT).Materials and MethodsThe patients underwent routine clinical evaluations before and after DBS (typically annually). Tremor severity and activities of daily living (ADL) were quantified by the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor-Rating-Scale (FTMTRS). QoL was assessed using the RAND SF-36-item Health Survey (RAND SF-36). In addition, we computed, in all four patients, the VTA based on the best stimulation settings using heuristic approaches included in the open source toolbox LEAD-DBS.ResultsIn all patients, tremor and ADL improved significantly at one-year post-DBS follow-up (34–61% improvement in FTMTRS total score compared to baseline). In three out of four patients, the improvement of tremor was sustained no longer than two to three years and only in one patient was sustained up to nine years. In this patient, the largest intersection between VTA and DBS target has been observed. Scores for ADL deteriorated over the course of time, reaching worse levels compared to baseline already during the three-year post-DBS follow-up, in three out of four patients. Physical and mental health component scores of RAND SF-36 had very different outcome between patients and follow-ups and were not associated with tremor-related outcomes.ConclusionsThe benefits of DBS in HT might not be always long lasting. Although QoL slightly improved, this change seemed to be independent of the motor outcome following DBS. The estimation of DBS target and VTA proximity could be a useful tool for DBS clinicians in order to facilitate the DBS programming process and optimize DBS treatment.     

Effects of Electrode Implantation Angle on Thalamic Stimulation for Treatment of Tremor

Introduction. Chronic thalamic stimulation has been confirmed as an effective treatment for tremor. The optimal target has been commonly accepted to be situated within the ventral thalamus, but a standard trajectory of the deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrode has not yet been established. Materials and Methods. A 53‐year‐old man with an 11‐year history of essential tremor was treated by DBS of the thalamus. In this patient, we had a chance to compare the effects of different trajectory angles of the DBS electrode on tremor. Results. Intraoperative stimulation with the DBS electrode temporarily inserted at a high angle to the horizontal plane of the anterior commissure–posterior commissure (AC–PC) line to cover only the nucleus ventralis intermedius (Vim) was not effective. In contrast, stimulation with the DBS electrode permanently implanted at a low angle, covering a wide area extending from the nucleus ventralis oralis (Vo) to the Vim, reduced the tremor. Conclusion. We report on the case of a patient who showed different effects on tremor depending on the trajectory angle of the DBS electrode to the AC–PC line. The insertion trajectory of the DBS electrode may be an important factor for the treatment of tremor.     

Deep Brain Stimulation of the Subthalamic Area for Dystonic Tremor

The stereotactic surgical target for dystonic tremor is the subject of ongoing debate. Targeting the subthalamic area using deep brain stimulation has been regaining interest as a therapy for various types of involuntary movements. We describe the efficacy of stimulation of the subthalamic area in a patient with intractable dystonic tremor. Excellent control without neurological complications was achieved. This case report demonstrates that the subthalamic area is a valuable target for the control of dystonic tremor.     

Directional Deep Brain Stimulation of the Thalamic Ventral Intermediate Area for Essential Tremor Increases Therapeutic Window

ObjectivesDeep brain stimulation (DBS) of the posterior subthalamic area (PSA) and the ventral intermediate thalamic nucleus (VIM) is a well-established therapy for essential tremor (ET), but it is frequently associated with side effects like dysarthria or gait ataxia. Directional DBS (dDBS) may be a way to activate fiber tracts more selectively. Is dDBS for ET superior to omnidirectional DBS (oDBS) regarding therapeutic window and clinically as effective as oDBS?Materials and MethodsTen patients with ET treated with PSA/VIM-DBS were recruited. Therapeutic window served as primary outcome parameter; clinical efficacy, volume of neuronal activation, and total electrical energy delivered (TEED) served as secondary outcome parameters. Therapeutic window was calculated for all three dDBS directions and for oDBS by determining therapeutic thresholds and side effect thresholds. Clinical efficacy was assessed by comparing the effect of best dDBS and oDBS on tremor and ataxia rating scales, and accelerometry. Volume of neural activation and TEED were also calculated for both paradigms.ResultsFor best dDBS, therapeutic window was wider and therapeutic threshold was lower compared to oDBS. While side effect threshold did not differ, volume of neural activation was larger for dDBS. In terms of clinical efficacy, dDBS was as effective as oDBS.ConclusionsdDBS for ET widens therapeutic window due to reduction of therapeutic threshold. Larger volume of neural activation for dDBS at side effect threshold supports the notion of persistent directionality even at higher intensities. dDBS may compensate for slightly misplaced leads and should be considered first line for PSA/VIM-DBS.     

脑血管疾病后Holmes震颤的临床、影像和电生理特点

目的 总结脑血管疾病后Holmes震颤的临床、影像和电生理特点。 方法 回顾性分析2015年8月-2019年8月就诊于首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院的4例脑血管疾病 所致Holmes震颤患者,对其临床、影像及电生理资料进行分析总结。 结果 4例患者中2例由高血压性脑出血引起,另外2例分别由脑动静脉畸形和脑海绵状血管瘤破裂 出血引起。Holmes震颤出现于原发病后1～24个月,表现为病灶对侧肢体震颤,以上肢多见。头颅MRI 检查显示2例患者病灶仅累及丘脑,2例同时累及丘脑和中脑。震颤分析显示静止、姿势、意向及持物 1000 g几种状态下震颤的峰频率均在2.6～3.8 Hz,意向状态震颤半宽功率高于静止状态。主动肌与 拮抗肌在静息时以同步收缩为主,姿势、意向和持物时以交替收缩为主。3例接受普拉克索治疗均有 不同程度缓解。 结论 Holmes震颤多由累及中脑、丘脑部位脑血管疾病引起,表现为2～4 Hz低频震颤,意向状态震 颤明显,部分患者多巴胺受体激动剂治疗有效。     

Deep brain stimulation in the treatment of Holmes tremor – A long-term case observation

We present the patient with Holmes tremor secondary to the infarction of thalamus, successfully treated with the deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the area between ventralis oralis anterior and zona incerta for a long time, in whom the severe tremor reappeared after removal of the DBS lead. This is the first presentation of the effective DBS on this location. Our case does not support the hypothesis that the DBS treatment could lead to sustained relief of symptoms after cessation of stimulation.     

Tremor and Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Essential Tremor Before and After Replacing Their Standard Deep Brain Stimulation With a Directional System

ObjectivesPatients with essential tremor treated with thalamic deep brain stimulation may experience increased tremor with the progression of their disease. Initially, this can be counteracted with increased stimulation. Eventually, this may cause unwanted side-effects as the circumferential stimulation from a standard ring contact spreads into adjacent regions. Directional leads may offer a solution to this clinical problem. We aimed to compare the ability of a standard and a directional system to reduce tremor without side-effects and to improve the quality of life for patients with advanced essential tremor.Materials and MethodsSix advanced essential tremor patients with bilateral thalamic deep brain stimulation had their standard system replaced with a directional system. Tremor rating scale scores were prospectively evaluated before and after the replacement surgery. Secondary analyses of quality of life related to tremor, voice, and general health were assessed.ResultsThere was a significantly greater reduction in tremor without side-effects (p = 0.017) when using the directional system. There were improvements in tremor (p = 0.031) and voice (p = 0.037) related quality of life but not in general health for patients using optimized stimulation settings with the directional system compared to the standard system.ConclusionsIn this cohort of advanced essential tremor patients who no longer had ideal tremor reduction with a standard system, replacing their deep brain stimulation with a directional system significantly improved their tremor and quality of life. Up-front implantation of directional deep brain stimulation leads may provide better tremor control in those patients who progress at a later time point.     

Directional Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease and Essential Tremor: The Cleveland Clinic Experience

ObjectiveTo assess use of directional stimulation in Parkinson's disease and essential tremor patients programmed in routine clinical care.Materials and MethodsPatients with Parkinson's disease or essential tremor implanted at Cleveland Clinic with a directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) system from November 2017 to October 2019 were included in this retrospective case series. Omnidirectional was compared against directional stimulation using therapeutic current strength, therapeutic window percentage, and total electrical energy delivered as outcome variables.ResultsFifty-seven Parkinson's disease patients (36 males) were implanted in the subthalamic nucleus (105 leads) and 33 essential tremor patients (19 males) were implanted in the ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus (52 leads). Seventy-four percent of patients with subthalamic stimulation (65% of leads) and 79% of patients with thalamic stimulation (79% of leads) were programmed with directional stimulation for their stable settings. Forty-six percent of subthalamic leads and 69% of thalamic leads were programmed on single segment activation. There was no correlation between the length of microelectrode trajectory through the STN and use of directional stimulation.ConclusionsDirectional programming was more common than omnidirectional programming. Substantial gains in therapeutic current strength, therapeutic window, and total electrical energy were found in subthalamic and thalamic leads programmed on directional stimulation.     

Deep brain stimulation for Holmes’ tremor related to a thalamic abscess

BACKGROUND: Medical treatment is usually ineffective for Holmes' tremor, and surgery is the treatment of choice for many patients. Here we report the case of a 14-year-old girl who developed Holmes' tremor related to a thalamic abscess and was successfully treated with thalamic deep brain stimulation. CASE REPORT: The patient presented with left hemiparesis and headache and was hospitalized. Investigation revealed a thalamic abscess in the left cerebral hemisphere. The abscess was drained via stereotactic surgery and a course of antibiotic treatment was completed. Four months after treatment, the patient developed Holmes' tremor in her left upper extremity. When attempts at medical treatment with levodopa, clonazepam, and trihexyphenidyl all failed, an implant was placed and deep brain stimulation of the ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus was initiated. During 2.5 years of follow-up, her tremor diminished by 90%. CONCLUSION: This case demonstrates that medically resistant Holmes' tremor related to a thalamic lesion can be successfully treated with thalamic deep brain stimulation.     

Tremor habituation to deep brain stimulation: Underlying mechanisms and solutions

DBS of the ventral intermediate nucleus is an extremely effective treatment for essential tremor, although a waning benefit is observed after a variable time in a variable proportion of patients (ranging from 0% to 73%), a concept historically defined as “tolerance.” Tolerance is currently an established concept in the medical community, although there is debate on its real existence. In fact, very few publications have actually addressed the problem, thus making tolerance a typical example of science based on “eminence rather than evidence.” The underpinnings of the phenomena associated with the progressive loss of DBS benefit are not fully elucidated, although the interplay of different—not mutually exclusive—factors has been advocated. In this viewpoint, we gathered the evidence explaining the progressive loss of benefit observed after DBS. We grouped these factors in three categories: disease‐related factors (tremor etiology and progression); surgery‐related factors (electrode location, microlesional effect and placebo); and stimulation‐related factors (not optimized stimulation, stimulation‐induced side effects, habituation, and tremor rebound). We also propose possible pathophysiological explanations for the phenomenon and define a nomenclature of the associated features: early versus late DBS failure; tremor rebound versus habituation (to be preferred over tolerance). Finally, we provide a practical approach for preventing and treating this loss of DBS benefit, and we draft a possible roadmap for the research to come. © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society     

Simultaneous Thalamic and Posterior Subthalamic Electrode Insertion With Single Deep Brain Stimulation Electrode for Essential Tremor

Objectives: The optimal target location of deep brain stimulation (DBS) is the subject of some controversy. We implanted electrodes that could stimulate both posterior subthalamic area (PSA) and ventralis intermedius nucleus of thalamus (Vim), and examined the benefits of bilateral DBS of Vim, PSA, and Vim + PSA in patients with essential tremor (ET). Materials and Methods: Electrodes were inserted into the Vim and PSA in ten hemispheres of five consecutive patients. All patients were assessed for action tremor, including postural and kinetic tremors, both preoperatively and at six months and one year postoperatively. Results: The preoperative mean postural tremor score was 1.9 (range 1.0–2.5) and kinetic tremor score was 2.6 (range 2.0–3.0). One year after surgery, these scores had decreased significantly to 0.1 (range 0.0–1.0) and 0.6 (range 0.0–1.5), respectively. The postural and kinetic tremor scores at six‐months and one‐year post‐surgery were similar for Vim, PSA, and Vim + PSA stimulation. Conclusions: We were able to identify the optimal electrode placement site for each patient based on his or her individualized response to the stimulation. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference among the DBS sites in terms of the benefits afforded by the stimulation. We propose that our technique may be a useful surgical method to treat ET.