Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Original research
GPi-DBS-induced brain metabolic activation in cervical dystonia
  1. Emma A Honkanen1,2,3,4,
  2. Jaana Rönkä1,5,
  3. Eero Pekkonen6,
  4. Juho Aaltonen2,
  5. Maija Koivu6,
  6. Olli Eskola4,
  7. Hazem Eldebakey7,
  8. Jens Volkmann7,
  9. Valtteri Kaasinen1,5,
  10. Martin M Reich7,
  11. Juho Joutsa1,2,4
  1. 1Neurocenter, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
  2. 2Turku Brain and Mind Center, Clinical Neurosciences, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
  3. 3Department of Neurology, Satasairaala Central Hospital, Pori, Finland
  4. 4Turku PET Centre, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
  5. 5Clinical Neurosciences, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
  6. 6Department of Neurology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
  7. 7Department of Neurology, University Hospital Wurzburg, Wurzburg, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr Juho Joutsa, Clinical Neurosciences, University of Turku, Turku, 20500, Finland; jtjout{at}utu.fi

Abstract

Background Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the globus pallidus interna (GPi) is a highly efficacious treatment for cervical dystonia, but its mechanism of action is not fully understood. Here, we investigate the brain metabolic effects of GPi-DBS in cervical dystonia.

Methods Eleven patients with GPi-DBS underwent brain 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging during stimulation on and off. Changes in regional brain glucose metabolism were investigated at the active contact location and across the whole brain. Changes in motor symptom severity were quantified using the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS), executive function using trail making test (TMT) and parkinsonism using Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS).

Results The mean (SD) best therapeutic response to DBS during the treatment was 81 (22)%. The TWSTRS score was 3.2 (3.9) points lower DBS on compared with off (p=0.02). At the stimulation site, stimulation was associated with increased metabolism, which correlated with DBS stimulation amplitude (r=0.70, p=0.03) but not with changes in motor symptom severity (p>0.9). In the whole brain analysis, stimulation increased metabolism in the GPi, subthalamic nucleus, putamen, primary sensorimotor cortex (PFDR<0.05). Acute improvement in TWSTRS correlated with metabolic activation in the sensorimotor cortex and overall treatment response in the supplementary motor area. Worsening of TMT-B score was associated with activation of the anterior cingulate cortex and parkinsonism with activation in the putamen.

Conclusions GPi-DBS increases metabolic activity at the stimulation site and sensorimotor network. The clinical benefit and adverse effects are mediated by modulation of specific networks.

  • MOVEMENT DISORDERS
  • DYSTONIA
  • PET, FUNCTIONAL IMAGING

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request. The result maps are available from the corresponding author on request. The individual patient data cannot be made publicly available according to the institutional regulations and national legislation.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request. The result maps are available from the corresponding author on request. The individual patient data cannot be made publicly available according to the institutional regulations and national legislation.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @EmmaHonkanen, @JJoutsa

  • Contributors EAH, MMR and JJ designed the study. EAH, JR, EP, MK, OE and JJ collected the data. EAH, JA, HE, MMR and JJ analysed the data. All authors took part in the interpretation of the results. EAH and JJ wrote the first draft. All authors critically revised the paper and approved the final version. EAH and JJ are guarantors of the work.

  • Funding The present work was supported by the Finnish Medical Foundation and Turku University Hospital (VTR-funds).

  • Competing interests The authors report no relevant competing interests. EAH was supported by The Finnish Parkinson Foundation, Turku University Foundation, The Finnish Medical Foundation and Turku University Hospital (VTR funds). EP is a member of the MDS Non-Motor Parkinson’s Disease Study Group, is a PI in Finland in International Adroit-study (Abbott DBS Registry of Outcomes for Indications over Time) and has received funding from Government research grant (TYH). HD was supported by the Nündel Foundation. JV reports grants and personal fees from Medtronic, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Abbott outside the submitted work. JV was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG, Project-ID424778381, TRR 295). VK serves as an advisory board member of AbbVie, has received travel expenses from Nordic Infucare AB and research funding from the Finnish Alcohol Research Foundation, the Päivikki and Sakari Sohlberg Foundation, the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society, and Finnish governmental research funding (VTR). MMR reports grant support and honoraria for speaking from Medtronic and Boston Scientific, outside the submitted and was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG, Project-ID424778381, TRR 295). JJ received grants from the Finnish Medical Foundation, Instrumentarium Research Foundation, Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies, University of Turku (Sigrid Juselius Foundation, Private Donation) and Turku University Hospital (ERVA funds), a congress travel grant from Abbott and Abbvie, lecturer honoraria from Lundbeck and Novartis, and consulting fees from Summaryx.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.