4.6 Article

Shorter Disease Duration Correlates With Improved Long-term Deep Brain Stimulation Outcomes in Young-Onset DYT1 Dystonia

期刊

NEUROSURGERY
卷 71, 期 2, 页码 325-330

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e318258e21b

关键词

Deep brain stimulation; DYT1 dystonia; Globus pallidus; Pediatrics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Treatment with deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the globus pallidus internus in children with DYT1 primary torsion dystonia is highly effective; however, individual response to stimulation is variable, and a greater understanding of predictors of long-term outcome is needed. OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term outcomes of subjects with young-onset DYT1 primary torsion dystonia treated with bilateral globus pallidus DBS. METHODS: Fourteen subjects (7 male, 7 female) treated consecutively from 2000 to 2010 at our center were included in this retrospective study. The Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale was performed at baseline and at 1, 2, and up to 6 years postoperatively. RESULTS: Pallidal DBS was well tolerated and highly effective, with mean Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale movement scores improving from baseline by 61.5% (P < .001) at 1 year, 64.4% (P < .001) at 2 years, and 70.3% (P < .001) at the final follow-up visit (mean, 32 months; range, 7-77 months). Disability scores also improved significantly. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed a significant influence of duration of disease as a predictor of percent improvement in Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale movement score at long-term follow-up (duration of disease, P < .05). Subjects with fixed orthopedic deformities (4) had less improvement in these regions. Location of the active DBS electrode used at final follow-up visit was not predictive of clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the sustained benefit from DBS and the importance of early referral for DBS in children with medically refractory DYT1 primary torsion dystonia, which can lead to improved long-term benefits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据