4.6 Review

Differential response to pallidal deep brain stimulation among monogenic dystonias: systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2019-322169

关键词

dystonia; deep brain stimulation; globus pallidus; genetics; monogenic

资金

  1. Zambon
  2. Abbvie
  3. Ralpharma
  4. NIH [1R01HL125016-01, 1 R21 HL143030-01, 1R21 AI133207, R21 AI118228, KL2 TR001426]
  5. CPRIT [PP180003, PP170068, PP170004, PP140164, 140211, PP110156, PP150031, PP130083]
  6. Medtronic
  7. Lusofarmaco
  8. UCB Pharma
  9. DOC
  10. Bial
  11. Stichting Parkinson Fonds
  12. Cure Parkinson Trust
  13. Drown Foundation
  14. NIH
  15. Parkinson's Foundation
  16. Michael J. Fox Foundation
  17. Parkinson Alliance
  18. Smallwood Foundation
  19. Bachmann-Strauss Foundation
  20. Tourette Syndrome Association
  21. UF Foundation
  22. Abbott
  23. Allergan
  24. Great Lakes Neurotechnologies
  25. Michael J Fox Foundation
  26. Lundbeck
  27. Academy for Healthcare Learning
  28. PeerView
  29. Prime
  30. QuantiaMD
  31. WebMD/Medscape
  32. Medicus
  33. MedNet
  34. Henry Stewart
  35. American Academy of Neurology
  36. Movement Disorders Society
  37. Vanderbilt University
  38. [R01 NR014852]
  39. [R01NS096008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective Genetic subtypes of dystonia may respond differentially to deep brain stimulation of the globus pallidus pars interna (GPi DBS). We sought to compare GPi DBS outcomes among the most common monogenic dystonias. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We searched PubMed for studies on genetically confirmed monogenic dystonia treated with GPi DBS documenting pre-surgical and post-surgical assessments using the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale Motor Score (BFMMS) and Burke-Fahn-Marsden Disability Score (BFMDS). We performed (i) meta-analysis for each gene mutation; (ii) weighted ordinary linear regression analyses to compare BFMMS and BFMDS outcomes between DYT-TOR1A and other monogenic dystonias, adjusting for age and disease duration and (iii) weighted linear regression analysis to estimate the effect of age, sex and disease duration on GPi DBS outcomes. Results were summarised with mean change and 95% CI. Results DYT-TOR1A (68%, 38.4 points; p<0.001), DYT-THAP1 (37% 14.5 points; p<0.001) and NBIA/DYT-PANK2 (27%, 21.4 points; p<0.001) improved in BFMMS; only DYT-TOR1A improved in BFMDS (69%, 9.7 points; p<0.001). Improvement in DYT-TOR1A was significantly greater than in DYT-THAP1 (BFMMS -31%), NBIA/DYT-PANK2 (BFMMS -35%; BFMDS -53%) and CHOR/DYT-ADCY5 (BFMMS -36%; BFMDS -42%). Worse motor outcomes were associated with longer dystonia duration and older age at dystonia onset in DYT-TOR1A, longer dystonia duration in DYT/PARK-TAF1 and younger age at dystonia onset in DYT-SGCE. Conclusions GPi DBS outcomes vary across monogenic dystonias. These data serve to inform patient selection and prognostic counselling.

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