Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulator placement using high-field interventional magnetic resonance imaging and a skull-mounted aiming device: technique and application accuracy.
OBJECTIVE
The authors discuss their method for placement of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes using interventional MR (iMR) imaging and report on the accuracy of the technique, its initial clinical efficacy, and associated complications in a consecutive series of subthalamic nucleus (STN) DBS implants to treat Parkinson disease (PD).


METHODS
A skull-mounted aiming device (Medtronic NexFrame) was used in conjunction with real-time MR imaging (Philips Intera 1.5T). Preoperative imaging, DBS implantation, and postimplantation MR imaging were integrated into a single procedure performed with the patient in a state of general anesthesia. Accuracy of implantation was assessed using 2 types of measurements: the "radial error," defined as the scalar distance between the location of the intended target and the actual location of the guidance sheath in the axial plane 4 mm inferior to the commissures, and the "tip error," defined as the vector distance between the expected anterior commissure-posterior commissure (AC-PC) coordinates of the permanent DBS lead tip and the actual AC-PC coordinates of the lead tip. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III (UPDRS III), in the off-medication state.


RESULTS
Twenty-nine patients with PD underwent iMR imaging-guided placement of 53 DBS electrodes into the STN. The mean (+/- SD) radial error was 1.2 +/- 0.65 mm, and the mean absolute tip error was 2.2 +/- 0.92 mm. The tip error was significantly smaller than for STN DBS electrodes implanted using traditional frame-based stereotaxy (3.1 +/- 1.41 mm). Eighty-seven percent of leads were placed with a single brain penetration. No hematomas were visible on MR images. Two device infections occurred early in the series. In bilaterally implanted patients, the mean improvement on the UPDRS III at 9 months postimplantation was 60%.


CONCLUSIONS
The authors' technical approach to placement of DBS electrodes adapts the procedure to a standard configuration 1.5-T diagnostic MR imaging scanner in a radiology suite. This method simplifies DBS implantation by eliminating the use of the traditional stereotactic frame and the subsequent requirement for registration of the brain in stereotactic space and the need for physiological recording and patient cooperation. This method has improved accuracy compared with that of anatomical guidance using standard frame-based stereotaxy in conjunction with preoperative MR imaging.
Starr
Philip A
PA
Department of Neurosurgery, University of California, San Francisco, California 94143, USA. starrp@neurosurg.ucsf.edu
Martin
Alastair J
AJ
Ostrem
Jill L
JL
Talke
Pekka
P
Levesque
Nadja
N
Larson
Paul S
PS
D000768:Anesthesia, General; D046690:Deep Brain Stimulation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D004567:Electrodes, Implanted / Q000009:adverse effects; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D053783:Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional; D008875:Middle Aged; D019635:Neurosurgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D010300:Parkinson Disease / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery / Q000628:therapy*; D012886:Skull; D013238:Stereotaxic Techniques; D020531:Subthalamic Nucleus / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome
J Neurosurg. 2005 Sep;103(3):404-13
16235670
Magn Reson Med. 2005 Nov;54(5):1107-14
16206144
Neurosurgery. 1999 Apr;44(4):807-13; discussion 813-4
10201306
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002 Jan;72(1):53-8
11784826
J Neurosurg. 2002 Nov;97(5):1115-24
12450034
Neurosurgery. 2000 Nov;47(5):1138-45; discussion 1145-6
11063107
J Neurosurg. 2002 Nov;97(5):1167-72
12450039
Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2004 Oct;47(5):284-9
15578341
Neurosurgery. 1994 Oct;35(4):682-94; discussion 694-5
7808612
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 1994;62(1-4):76-84
7631092
J Neurosurg. 2001 Jan;94(1):67-71
11147900
J Neurosurg. 2002 Aug;97(2):370-87
12186466
Brain. 2006 Jul;129(Pt 7):1732-47
16720681
Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2005 Feb;48(1):1-6
15747209
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007 Dec;26(6):1429-35
17968897
J Neurosurg. 2004 Apr;100(4):611-8
15070113
Mov Disord. 2003 Jul;18(7):791-8
12815658
Comput Aided Surg. 2004;9(4):155-60
16192055
Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005 Jan;16(1):201-13
15561539
J Neurosurg. 2002 Nov;97(5):1152-66
12450038
Neurosurgery. 1999 Sep;45(3):423-31; discussion 431-3
10493363
J Neurol. 2006 Oct;253(10):1347-55
16788774
Arch Neurol. 2008 May;65(5):612-6
18474736
Brain. 2001 Sep;124(Pt 9):1777-90
11522580
Brain. 1999 Oct;122 ( Pt 10):1919-31
10506093
Neurosurg Focus. 2005 Nov 15;19(5):E12
16398462
Arch Neurol. 2005 Aug;62(8):1250-5
15956104
Mov Disord. 2006 Jun;21 Suppl 14:S171-96
16810718
Surg Neurol. 2004 Sep;62(3):216-25; discussion 225-6
15336862
J Neurosurg. 2007 Jul;107(1):37-42
17639871