To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter explores the evolution and future of invasive monitoring in epilepsy surgery, emphasizing the impact of technological advancements and conceptual shifts. The goal of epilepsy neurosurgery is to enhance brain function by precisely targeting and removing malfunctioning brain areas. Due to the brain’s complexity, detailed and accurate information about each patient’s condition is vital. Invasive monitoring, a diagnostic procedure involving the placement of recording electrodes in the brain, provides critical data for crafting tailored surgical strategies. Historically, the use of invasive monitoring evolved with the development of electrocorticography (ECoG) and stereotactic electroencephalography (sEEG). Early implementations relied on ictal symptoms and non-invasive techniques such as EEG, but advancements in electrode placement, notably by Jean Talairach and subsequent pioneers, enabled precise localization of seizure onset zones (SOZ). The regional divide saw North America favoring subdural grids, while Europe preferred sEEG, leading to a revolution in epilepsy surgery practice. Currently, sEEG dominates due to its ability to record deep brain structures and offer comprehensive network analysis. This shift is bolstered by innovations such as robot-assisted stereotaxy and MRI-guided laser therapy. The chapter concludes by highlighting the potential future directions, including enhanced computational analysis, Bayesian approaches, and artificial intelligence, which promise to refine surgical planning and improve patient outcomes.
Neurological disorders are the leading cause of disability worldwide. Restoring function through the modulation of brain networks has been a cornerstone in the field of functional restoration. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) along with neuroprosthetics such as cochlear implants have significantly improved the quality of life for patients with functional restoration. However, there remains a large population of patients who cannot benefit from existing approved medical technologies. Brain–machine interfaces (BMI) show great promise in addressing the unmet need in diagnostic and functional needs for patients with neurological disorders and disabilities. To date, more humans have received clinical benefit from the Utah Array than from any other BMI, but this also had several limitations. Recent advances in BMI address these limitations, showing improvements in invasiveness, longevity, signal quality, and usability. This chapter provides an overview of BMI and discusses the evolving technology in the field of BMI, which provides a novel dimension to the existing neurosurgical armamentarium modulating neurological function beyond the conventional neurosurgical treatment.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is being investigated as a treatment for patients with refractory major depressive disorder (MDD). However, little is known about how DBS exerts its antidepressive effects. Here, we investigated whether ventral anterior limb of the internal capsule stimulation modulates a limbic network centered around the amygdala in patients with treatment-resistant MDD.
Methods
Nine patients underwent resting state functional magnetic resonance scans before DBS surgery and after 1 year of treatment. In addition, they were scanned twice within 2 weeks during the subsequent double-blind cross-over phase with active and sham treatment. Twelve matched controls underwent scans at the same time intervals to account for test–retest effects. The imaging data were investigated with functional connectivity (FC) analysis and dynamic causal modelling.
Results
Results showed that 1 year of DBS treatment was associated with increased FC of the left amygdala with precentral cortex and left insula, along with decreased bilateral connectivity between nucleus accumbens and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. No changes in FC were observed during the cross-over phase. Effective connectivity analyses using dynamic causal models revealed widespread amygdala-centric changes between presurgery and 1 year follow-up, while the cross-over phase was associated with insula-centric changes between active and sham stimulation.
Conclusions
These results suggest that ventral anterior limb of the internal capsule DBS results in complex rebalancing of the limbic network involved in emotion, reward, and interoceptive processing.
Neurophysiology is a broad discipline involved in the recording and analysis of biological signals of multiple modalities relevant to the nervous system. Neurophysiological studies have contributed substantially to the understanding of the neurobiological underpinnings of psychiatric disease. In clinical psychiatry, EEG and other studies are secondary to the clinical assessment for a reliable diagnosis and prognostication of psychiatric disease, and should not be interpreted in isolation. However, in some clinical situations, such as non-epileptic seizures, they can be confirmatory of the diagnosis. In this chapter, we start with an overview of basic principles in neurophysiology, from cellular and molecular to systems neuroscience. We then describe the technical aspects, rationale, indications and limitations of the most commonly used neurophysiological tests in clinically psychiatry. We outline the main neurophysiological abnormalities present in primary psychiatric disorders and in their differential diagnoses (delirium, epilepsy, dementia, focal cerebral lesions and sleep disorders), as well as the neurophysiological effect of psychotropic medications. We also describe recent advances in neuromodulation techniques, linking diagnosis to therapy.
Tics are brief, sudden, non-rhythmic, repetitive movements. Tics can be motor or vocal. Further, both motor and vocal tics can be either simple or complex. Simple tics typically involve only one group of muscles and are brief and meaningless, whereas complex tics may last longer and appear more purposeful. Tic disorders usually begin in childhood and are classified according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) into four groups: (1) provisional tic disorder, (2) chronic motor or vocal tic disorder, (3) Tourette disorder (or Gilles de la Tourette syndrome), (4) tic disorder not otherwise specified. As tics can resemble almost any other movement disorder, phenotypic analysis alone is insufficient and patients must be questioned whether the execution is preceded by a premonitory sensation (urge to do, urge to move) and whether a temporary control of the movement can be achieved. Also, relief following execution of the tic is frequently reported. There are no biomarkers available for tics and diagnosis therefore remains strictly clinical.
Dystonia is a heterogeneous group of diseases with important variability in phenomenology and underlying etiology and pathophysiology. Treatment must be individualized according to the symptomatology and needs of a specific patient. Several efficacious treatments to improve the symptoms of dystonia exist, but few treatments for metabolic and other disorders causing dystonia. The most important therapeutic options are described and discussed. Better understanding of the genetics and pathophysiology of dystonia, the progress of deep brain stimulation, and the possibility of physical therapy greatly improved multimodal therapeutic management of the dystonia patient. However, we are far from a cure; we can only rarely eliminate symptoms, with a few exceptions. For successful treatment, we need to consider specific motor and non-motor aspects of dystonia, different from other movement disorders. It is particularly important to understand the possibility and limitation of each therapeutic option in order to propose and combine different treatments according to the needs of a specific patient.
The treatment of tremor is challenging, and therapeutic options are often limited and non-specific. Treatment always has to be individualized, and apart from the objective severity of tremor, significant importance should be given to subjective severity and impact of the tremor on the patient. Supportive non-pharmacologic and non-surgical methods should be incorporated into the treatment regimen. Finally, surgical therapy is proven and effective in several tremor syndromes and should be offered to eligible patients.
Secondary dystonia comprises a group of diverse dystonia syndromes, including hereditary diseases with a clinical phenotype exceeding dystonia as well as acquired dystonia. The first step in the classification of dystonic symptoms should be according to its clinical characteristics – age at onset, body distribution, temporal pattern and associated features. Limb dystonia in adulthood, as well as craniocervical dystonia presentation in childhood and young adolescence, point away from primary dystonia causes. Associated clinical features such as oculomotor disturbances, parkinsonism, cognitive and neuropsychiatric symptoms, and systemic involvement can be instructive for identifying the underlying dystonia syndrome. The diagnostic workup in patients with secondary dystonia depends on the suspected dystonia syndrome and can include laboratory tests in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, genetic testing, etc. It is important to identify potential treatable causes, e.g., dopa-responsive dystonia, Wilson’s disease, Niemann–Pick Type C, infectious and autoimmune diseases, etc. Symptomatic treatments are also available.
Dystonia, defined as a movement disorder characterized by sustained or intermittent muscle contractions causing abnormal, often repetitive, movements, postures, or both, results in patterned, twisted, and sometimes tremulous movements. When dystonia is the sole manifestation, it is known as primary dystonia. Primary dystonia is an uncommon disorder and includes genetic forms of dystonia as well as idiopathic dystonia. Dystonia can involve one body part, when it is called focal; more than one contiguous body part, when it is known as segmental; or involving the trunk and more than two body parts, when it is called generalized. This chapter reviews primary dystonia: the epidemiology, the current theories of pathophysiology, the clinical description, and available treatments of genetic as well as the various forms of focal dystonia, including blepharospasm, oromandibular dystonia, laryngeal dystonia, cervical dystonia, focal hand dystonia and truncal dystonia.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an important treatment for Parkinson’s disease, tremor and dystonia in appropriately selected patients. The Canada Health Act emphasizes equity and “reasonable access to medically necessary hospital and physician services.” How to define “reasonable access” has not been well studied. We aimed to assess access to DBS implantation surgery and to determine the time required from initial assessment through to surgery and which step(s) delay the implantation.
Methods:
DBS implants from 2016 to 2023 at the University of Alberta were analyzed. The neurologists’ decision to proceed with DBS marks the start of the workup. The time required to see a neurosurgeon, psychiatrist, neuropsychologist and healthcare allies and to receive DBS surgery was assessed. The impact of COVID-19 was studied.
Results:
The total time from starting the workup to DBS surgery was 387.76 ± 125.19 days prior to COVID-19, and marked delay occurred during and post-COVID-19 (840.15 ± 165.41 days and 839.78 ± 300.66 days, respectively). Most workups were done within 6 months pre-COVID-19, although a big range existed due to variable factors. The longest delay to surgery was from consent to DBS implantation, owing to a lack of operative time. There has not been a recovery post-pandemic.
Conclusions:
Time to DBS implantation surgery from initial decision is lengthy and more than doubled over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. The biggest delay was in the time from consent to implantation surgery, which has not improved despite the pandemic having ended.
To introduce the Emory 10-element Complex Figure (CF) scoring system and recognition task. We evaluated the relationship between Emory CF scoring and traditional Osterrieth CF scoring approach in cognitively healthy volunteers. Additionally, a cohort of patients undergoing deep brain stimulation (DBS) evaluation was assessed to compare the scoring methods in a clinical population.
Method:
The study included 315 volunteers from the Emory Healthy Brain Study (EHBS) with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores of 24/30 or higher. The clinical group consisted of 84 DBS candidates. Scoring time differences were analyzed in a subset of 48 DBS candidates.
Results:
High correlations between scoring methods were present for non-recognition components in both cohorts (EHBS: Copy r = 0.76, Immediate r = 0.86, Delayed r = 0.85, Recognition r = 47; DBS: Copy r = 0.80, Immediate r = 0.84, Delayed Recall r = 0.85, Recognition r = 0.37). Emory CF scoring times were significantly shorter than Osterrieth times across non-recognition conditions (all p < 0.00001, individual Cohen’s d: 1.4–2.4), resulting in an average time savings of 57%. DBS patients scored lower than EHBS participants across CF memory measures, with larger effect sizes for Emory CF scoring (Cohen’s d range = 1.0–1.2). Emory CF scoring demonstrated better group classification in logistic regression models, improving DBS candidate classification from 16.7% to 32.1% compared to Osterrieth scoring.
Conclusions:
Emory CF scoring yields results that are highly correlated with traditional Osterrieth scoring, significantly reduces scoring time burden, and demonstrates greater sensitivity to memory decline in DBS candidates. Its efficiency and sensitivity make Emory CF scoring well-suited for broader implementation in clinical research.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) improves motor outcomes in Parkinson’s disease (PD) but may have adverse long-term effects on specific cognitive domains. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between total electrical energy (TEED) delivered by DBS and postoperative changes in verbal fluency.
Methods
Seventeen PD patients undergoing bilateral STN-DBS were assessed with the Alternate Verbal Fluency Battery (AVFB), which includes phonemic (PVF), semantic (SVF), and alternate verbal fluency (AVF) tests, before surgery (T0) and after 6 (T1) and 12 months (T2). Bilateral TEED and average TEEDM were recorded at T1 and T2. For each AVFB measurement, changes from T0 to T1 (Δ-01) and from T0 to T2 (Δ-02) were calculated.
Results
At T1, PVF (p = 0.007) and SVF scores (p = 0.003) decreased significantly. TEED measures at T1 and T2 were unrelated to Δ-01 and Δ-02 scores, respectively. However, an inverse, marginally significant association was detected between the TEEDM and Δ-01 scores for the AVF (p = 0.041, against an αadjusted = 0.025).
Conclusions
In conclusion, the present reports provide preliminary evidence that TEED may not be responsible or only slightly responsible for the decline in VF performance after STN-DBS in PD.
The ongoing debate within neuroethics concerning the degree to which neuromodulation such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) changes the personality, identity, and agency (PIA) of patients has paid relatively little attention to the perspectives of prospective patients. Even less attention has been given to pediatric populations. To understand patients’ views about identity changes due to DBS in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), the authors conducted and analyzed semistructured interviews with adolescent patients with OCD and their parents/caregivers. Patients were asked about projected impacts to PIA generally due to DBS. All patient respondents and half of caregivers reported that DBS would impact patient self-identity in significant ways. For example, many patients expressed how DBS could positively impact identity by allowing them to explore their identities free from OCD. Others voiced concerns that DBS-related resolution of OCD might negatively impact patient agency and authenticity. Half of patients expressed that DBS may positively facilitate social access through relieving symptoms, while half indicated that DBS could increase social stigma. These views give insights into how to approach decision-making and informed consent if DBS for OCD becomes available for adolescents. They also offer insights into adolescent experiences of disability identity and “normalcy” in the context of OCD.
Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is an FDA-approved treatment for Parkinson's Disease (PD), for which the medical workup includes routine pre- and post- operative neuropsychological assessment to determine potential surgical cognitive risk. Existing research suggests that cognitively normal individuals experience good cognitive outcome, whereas those with pre-existing cognitive deficits are prone to accelerated cognitive decline post-DBS. The goal of this study is to identify characteristics that determine which individuals with PD are at risk for accelerated post-DBS cognitive loss, and to characterize the nature of the decline in this population.
Participants and Methods:
We conducted a retrospective chart review of PD- DBS patients who completed their DBS workup and surgery at Mount Sinai Hospital NYC between 2015 and 2022. Non-English speakers were excluded from this study due to small sample size and use of a neurocognitive battery different from that of English speakers. Using repeated measures t-tests, chi square, and regression analyses, we explored variables related to disease (e.g., duration, L-Dopa burden, DBS target), socio-demographic background (e.g., age onset, current age, education), assessment modality (telehealth vs in-office), neurocognitive performances (e.g., WMS-IV Logical Memory (LM), HVLT-R, WASI-II Matrix & Similarities, WAIS-IV Digit Span), and cognitive diagnosis (amnestic vs non-amnestic MCI) for all individuals in the sample. At the individual level, we utilized Reliable Change Indices (RCI) to identify clinically significant cognitive differences from pre- to post-DBS exam. We considered LM- Delayed Recall (LMDR) as a proxy for memory loss, as this cognitive function is expected to remain generally unchanged post PD-DBS. Therefore, decline on this measure in the first year after DBS could indicate a change in global memory function and possible evidence of accelerated postoperative decline.
Results:
Of 65 charts reviewed, 44 patients were native English-speaking and included in our analyses. At the group level, there were no significant differences in disease characteristics, socio-demographic variables, or cognitive classification between those who declined versus those who did not decline on LMDR. Regression statistics for predictors of cognitive decline also were non-significant. Of the eight individuals who declined on LMDR, one patient declined on a total of one neuropsychological measure, four declined on a total of two measures, two declined on a total of three measures, and one declined on a total of four measures. Two of these eight individuals had a diagnosis that changed to amnestic MCI based on concomitant interval history of ADL compromise. Of these two individuals, one declined in two tests and the other declined in four tests. Six of the eight individuals who declined also showed abnormalities in their imaging with either edema or hemorrhage.
Conclusions:
Our analysis is unique in that we explored cognitive decline at both the group and individual levels. Despite this, we did not find predictors of post-DBS cognitive decline. Further detailed analysis of additional post-operative factors that might play a greater role in our understanding of this phenomenon is warranted. This said, our data do support that the majority of individuals with non-amnestic MCI did not decline cognitively.
This is the second paper in a two-part series describing subject and family perspectives from the CENTURY-S (CENtral Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain InjURY-Safety) first-in-human invasive neurological device trial to achieve cognitive restoration in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI). To participate, subjects were independently assessed to formally establish decision-making capacity to provide voluntary informed consent. Here, we report on post-operative interviews conducted after a successful trial of thalamic stimulation. All five msTBI subjects met a pre-selected primary endpoint of at least a 10% improvement in completion time on Trail-Making-Test Part B, a marker of executive function. We describe narrative responses of subjects and family members, refracted against that success. Interviews following surgery and the stimulation trial revealed the challenge of adaptation to improvements in cognitive function and emotional regulation as well as altered (and restored) relationships and family dynamics. These improvements exposed barriers to social reintegration made relevant by recoveries once thought inconceivable. The study’s success sparked concerns about post-trial access to implanted devices, financing of device maintenance, battery replacement, and on-going care. Most subjects and families identified the need for supportive counseling to adapt to the new trajectory of their lives.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been proposed to improve symptoms of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) but is not yet an established therapy.
Aims
To identify relevant guidelines and assess their recommendations for the use of DBS in OCD.
Method
Medline, Embase, American Psychiatric Association PsycInfo and Scopus were searched, as were websites of relevant societies and guideline development organisations. The review was based on the PRISMA recommendations, and the search strategy was verified by a medical librarian. The protocol was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022353715). The guidelines were assessed for quality using the AGREE II instrument.
Results
Nine guidelines were identified. Three guidelines scored >80% on AGREE II. ‘Scope and Purpose’ and ‘Editorial Independence’ were the highest scoring domains, but ‘Applicability’ scores were low. Eight guidelines recommended that DBS is used after all other treatment options have failed to alleviate OCD symptoms. One guideline did not recommend DBS beyond a research setting. Only one guideline performed a cost-effectiveness analysis; the other eight did not provide details on safe or effective DBS protocols.
Conclusion
Despite a very limited evidence base, eight of the nine identified guidelines supported the use of DBS for OCD as a last line of therapy; however, multiple aspects of DBS provision were not addressed.
Neurosurgery for mental disorder is performed in the UK for treatment-refractory obsessive–compulsive disorder and depression. In this commentary, the procedures used are considered alongside other surgical interventions for psychiatric conditions. Given the evidence for efficacy, this commentary agrees with Whitehead & Barrera's assessment that such procedures be considered more widely in treatment-refractory illness and concurs that the advent of minimally invasive radiosurgery is an exciting prospect for patients who have not responded to other treatments.
This is the first article in a two-part series describing subject and family perspectives from the central thalamic deep brain stimulation for the treatment of traumatic brain injury using the Medtronic PC + S first-in-human invasive neurological device trial to achieve cognitive restoration in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, with subjects who were deemed capable of providing voluntary informed consent. In this article, we report on interviews conducted prior to surgery wherein we asked participants about their experiences recovering from brain injury and their perspectives on study enrollment and participation. We asked how risks and benefits were weighed, what their expectations and fears were, and how decisions were reached about trial participation. We found that informed consent and enrollment decisions are fraught. Subjects and families were often split, with subjects more focused on putative benefits and families concerned about incremental risk. Both subjects and families viewed brain injury as disruptive to personal identity and relationships. As decisions were made about study enrollment, families struggled with recognizing the re-emergent agency of subjects and ceding decision-making authority to subjects who had previously been dependent upon them for protection and guidance. Subjects and family members reported a hope for the relief of cognitive disabilities, improved quality of life, normalization of interpersonal interactions, and a return to work or school as reasons for study participation, along with altruism and a desire to advance science. Despite these aspirations, both subjects and families appreciated the risks of the intervention and did not suffer from a therapeutic misconception. A second essay to be published in the next issue of Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics—Clinical Neuroethics will describe interviews conducted after surgery, the effects of cognitive restoration for subjects, families, and challenges presented to the social structures they will call upon to support them through recovery. This subsequent article will be available online prior to its formal publication in October 2023.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is effective for refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Post-operative cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) may augment the effects of DBS, but previous results are conflicting. Here, we investigated whether CBT augments the effect of DBS for OCD.
Method
Patients with and without CBT following DBS of the ventral anterior limb of the internal capsule were included. First, we analyzed Yale–Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) scores before, during and after CBT in all patients with CBT. Second, we matched patients with and without CBT based on clinical baseline variables and initial response to DBS and compared the course of Y-BOCS and HAM-D scores over the same timeframe.
Results
In total, 36 patients with and 16 patients without CBT were included. Average duration of CBT was 10.4 months (s.d. 6.4). In the 36 patients with CBT, Y-BOCS scores decreased on average by 3.8 points (14.8%) from start until end of CBT (p = 0.043). HAM-D scores did not decrease following CBT. Second, 10 patients with CBT were matched to 10 patients without CBT. In both groups, Y-BOCS scores decreased equally from start until end of CBT or over a similar timeframe (10% in CBT group v. 13.1% in no-CBT group, p = 0.741).
Conclusions
Obsessive-compulsive symptoms decreased over time in patients with and without post-operative CBT. Therefore, further improvement may be attributed to late effects of DBS itself. The present study emphasizes the need for prospective randomized controlled studies, examining the effects of CBT.