J 2018

Learning Curve in Anatomo-Electrophysiological Correlations in Subthalamic Nucleus Stimulation

HRABOVSKÝ, Dušan, Marek BALÁŽ, Martina BOČKOVÁ, Věra FEITOVÁ, Zdeněk NOVÁK et. al.

Základní údaje

Originální název

Learning Curve in Anatomo-Electrophysiological Correlations in Subthalamic Nucleus Stimulation

Autoři

HRABOVSKÝ, Dušan (703 Slovensko, domácí), Marek BALÁŽ (703 Slovensko, domácí), Martina BOČKOVÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí), Věra FEITOVÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí), Zdeněk NOVÁK (203 Česká republika, domácí) a Jan CHRASTINA (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí)

Vydání

TURKISH NEUROSURGERY, BAHCELIEVLER, TURKISH NEUROSURGICAL SOC, 2018, 1019-5149

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

30210 Clinical neurology

Stát vydavatele

Turecko

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Impakt faktor

Impact factor: 0.896

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14110/18:00102996

Organizační jednotka

Lékařská fakulta

DOI

UT WoS

000428044700020

Klíčová slova anglicky

Deep brain stimulation; Parkinson's disease; Subthalamic nucleus; Frame-based stereotaxy; Intraoperative monitoring

Štítky

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 12. 3. 2019 12:33, Mgr. Pavla Foltynová, Ph.D.

Anotace

V originále

AIM: Advances in neuroradiological planning techniques in deep brain stimulation have put the need for intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring into doubt. Moreover intraoperative monitoring prolongs surgical time and there is potential association between the use of microelectrodes and increased incidence of hemorrhagic complications. The aim of this study was to analyze the correlation between the anatomically planned trajectory and the final subthalamic electrode placement after electrophysiological monitoring in patients with Parkinson's disease and its change with the increasing experience of the surgical team. MATERIAL and METHODS: The trajectories of right (first implanted) and left electrodes were compared in the first 50 patients operated on (Group 1) and the next 50 patients (Group 2). RESULTS: In Group 1, 52% of central trajectories were on the right and 38% on the left; in Group 2, the percentage of central trajectories was 76% on the right and 78% on the left; the difference was statistically significant (p=0.021 and 0.001). The difference in the percentage of posterior trajectories reflecting brain shift between the right and left sides was statistically insignificant in Groups 1 (26% and 28%, p=0.999) and 2 (18% and 12%, p=0.549). The percentage of bilateral central electrodes was 14% and 62% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSION: The correlation between anatomically planned trajectory and final electrode placement markedly improves with the number of patients. However the significant percentage of patients with final electrode trajectory differing from anatomically planned target supports the use of intraoperative monitoring.