Anatomical targeting for electrode localization in subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation: A comparative study.

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorTonroe, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorMcDermott, Hugh
dc.contributor.authorPearce, Patrick
dc.contributor.authorAcevedo, Nicola
dc.contributor.authorThevathasan, Wesley
dc.contributor.authorXu, San San
dc.contributor.authorBulluss, Kristian
dc.contributor.authorPerera, Thushara
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-08T04:01:10Z
dc.date.available2024-01-08T04:01:10Z
dc.date.issued2023-06-08
dc.description.abstractIn deep brain stimulation (DBS), accurate electrode placement is essential for optimizing patient outcomes. Localizing electrodes enables insight into therapeutic outcomes and development of metrics for use in clinical trials. Methods of defining anatomical targets have been described with varying accuracy and objectivity. To assess variability in anatomical targeting, we compare four methods of defining an appropriate target for DBS of the subthalamic nucleus for Parkinson's disease.
dc.description.abstractThe methods compared are direct visualization, red nucleus-based indirect targeting, mid-commissural point-based indirect targeting, and automated template-based targeting. This study assessed 226 hemispheres in 113 DBS recipients (39 females, 73 males, 62.2 ± 7.7 years). We utilized the electrode placement error (the Euclidean distance between the defined target and closest DBS electrode) as a metric for comparative analysis. Pairwise differences in electrode placement error across the four methods were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis H-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.
dc.description.abstractInterquartile ranges of the differences in electrode placement error spanned 1.18-1.56 mm. A Kruskal-Wallis H-test reported a statistically significant difference in the median of at least two groups (H(5) = 41.052, p < .001). Wilcoxon signed-rank tests reported statistically significant difference in two comparisons: direct visualization versus red nucleus-based indirect, and direct visualization versus automated template-based methods (T < 9215, p < .001).
dc.description.abstractAll methods were similarly discordant in their relative accuracy, despite having significant technical differences in their application. The differing protocols and technical aspects of each method, however, have the implication that one may be more practical depending on the clinical or research application at hand.
dc.description.sponsorshipColonial Foundation; St Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne, Grant/Award Number: 81895; National Health and Medical Research Council, Grant/Award Number: 1103238; State Government of Victoria; RMIT University; Lions Clubs International Foundation
dc.identifier.citationTonroe T, McDermott H, Pearce P, Acevedo N, ThevathasanW, Xu SS, et al. Anatomical targeting for electrode localization in subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation: A comparative study. J Neuroimaging. 2023;1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.13133
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.bionicsinstitute.org/handle/123456789/428
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherJournal of NeuroImaging
dc.subjectParkinson's disease
dc.subjectanatomical targeting
dc.subjectautomation
dc.subjectdeep brain stimulation
dc.subjectelectrode localization
dc.subjectneuroimaging
dc.subjectsubthalamic nucleus
dc.titleAnatomical targeting for electrode localization in subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation: A comparative study.
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Tonroe_2023_AnatomicalTargeting (1).pdf
Size:
2.15 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.67 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
BI publications