MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4392706179 · doi:10.1002/mds.29747

Effects of <scp>GPi DBS</scp> on Sensorimotor Integration in Dystonia: A Pilot <scp>ON</scp>/<scp>OFF</scp> Study

2024· letter· en· W4392706179 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Ana Paula Arantes, Nicole A. Zalasky, Ludymila Ribeiro Borges, Rachel E. Sondergaard, Davide Martino, Zelma H. T. Kiss

Notice bibliographique

RevueMovement Disorders · 2024
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueNeurological disorders and treatments
Établissements canadiensHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineNeurosciencePsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the globus pallidus pars interna (GPi) is an effective therapy for severe dystonia; however, the mechanism by which DBS improves dystonia is still poorly understood.1-3 To determine the role of cholinergic modulation in dystonia and DBS, we measured short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI), a transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) protocol sensitive to cortical cholinergic function.4 We studied patients with dystonia in both DBS-ON and DBS-OFF conditions, expecting that DBS state would modify SAI. Although cholinergic modulation is known to influence long-term plasticity,5 SAI has never been studied in GPi-DBS. The SAI protocol consisted of 120 TMS pulses (at the lowest stimulator intensity producing a motor evoked potential (MEP) of approximately 1 mV in 5/10 trials) delivered to the dominant motor cortex, preceded by suprathreshold (meaning 2X perceptual threshold) electrical nerve stimulation (NS) applied to the contralateral median nerve using three interstimulus intervals (ISI, 21, 25, and 27 ms) (Fig. 1A). SAI is defined as the inhibition induced by the NS conditioned compared to unconditioned TMS trials (Fig. 1B) and is represented as a ratio. Testing was performed with DBS-ON or -OFF first and repeated after a 20-minute washout/rest between conditions. In 10 patients (3M/7F, 57.6 ± 12.9 years) with GPi-DBS, there were no significant differences in SAI comparing DBS-ON (mean SAI = 0.9052) and DBS-OFF (mean SAI = 0.7441) (paired t-test, t[9] = 2.63, P = 0.0803). At least one of the ISIs produced inhibition in all but one patient. Similarly, the sex- and age-matched control group (3M/7F; 57.6 ± 11.9 years) displayed no difference between SAI in the first versus second testing condition (t[9] = −0.048, P = 0.582). A two-way ANOVA comparing SAIs between conditions (ON/OFF) and groups (Patient/Control) showed no statistically significant interaction between effects and group (F[1] = 0.879, P = 0.355) (Fig. 1D). Neither group nor condition was statistically related to the mean amplitude of SAI (F(1) = 1.655, P = 0.207; F(1) = 3.016, P = 0.091). SAI was normal in dystonia subjects relative to age- and sex-matched controls, and GPi-DBS did not alter SAI. As in previous reports,4 SAI was quite variable (Fig. 1B); age, experimental environment, cognitive attention, sleep, and other factors can influence SAI. SAI has been reported to be both normal and abnormal in dystonia,6 and DBS in subthalamic nucleus is believed to normalize it.2 Because our protocol was limited by the short time available for testing, it is possible that the brief interruption in DBS in chronic DBS patients may have been insufficient, preventing a statistically significant change in SAI to be measured. Similarly, mixed medication use within a heterogeneous cohort may have been a factor. It is also possible that increased inhibition may have been observed using a higher peripheral nerve stimulation intensity. We previously showed that DBS in the rodent equivalent of GPi results in cholinergic modulation of neuronal activity with extracellular recordings in patients during surgery confirming similar findings.7 SAI, however, is thought to depend on cortical cholinergic activity that may be unrelated to local DBS effects in the basal ganglia. Compared to subthalamic (STN)-DBS, which works faster to treat dystonia,2 clinical benefits occur gradually with GPi-DBS for dystonia.3 This is consistent with our results because only one of our patients had worsening dystonia OFF GPi-DBS. The different time course of response to STN-DBS and GPi-DBS does suggest different mechanisms of action for the two treatments, and cholinergic activity may still play a role in the long-term brain plasticity associated with DBS improvement. Also, variability in plasticity measures has not only been acknowledged but has also been suggested to be informative in dystonia.8 SAI changes between DBS-ON and -OFF states approach significance in our small and heterogeneous patient cohort following brief DBS interruption; this warrants further mechanistic inquiry into GPi-DBS in dystonia aimed to delineate sources of variability in plasticity measures such as those that may modify cholinergic function. This study was funded by the Dystonia Medical Research Foundation and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada. A.P.A. holds a BRAIN-CREATE Postdoctoral Fellowship, and R.E.S. held an NSERC studentship. We thank all study participants for agreeing to be part of our study. (1) Research project: A. Conception, B. Organization, C. Execution; (2) Statistical Analysis: A. Design, B. Execution, C. Review and Critique; (3) Manuscript Preparation: A. Writing of the first draft, B. Review and Critique. (4) Patient recruitment. A.P.A.: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B N.A.Z.: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3B R.E.S.: 1A, 2C, 3B Z.H.T.K.: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, 4 L.R.B.: 1B, 1C, 2C D.M.: 1A, 3B, 4 The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,009

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,244 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai non randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMovement DisordersMême sujetNeurological disorders and treatmentsTravaux en français237 207