Department of Neurology, University of Pécs
Pécs, Baranya, H-7623, Hungary
NCT Number: NCT01497639
The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy and the safety profile of the newly introduced interleaving stimulation mode to those of the standard double monopolar stimulation mode during pallidal deep brain stimulation of primary generalized or segmental dystonia.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me7 year–75 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Pécs, Baranya, H-7623, Hungary
Background:
For the treatment of drug-refractory dystonia, bilateral pallidal deep brain stimulation (GPi-DBS) is proven to be an efficient option. On average, 40-55% improvement on dystonia rating scales (DRS) could be achieved according to the results of multicenter trials lasting for years. However, a considerable portion (10-25%) of the patients experience minimal alleviation despite of good electrode placement. These patients can be regarded as non-responders to GPi-DBS defined as having either limited improvement (< 25% on DRS) or worsening. Besides adjusting the amplitude, frequency or pulse-width of stimulation, one can change the electrode configuration from the commonly applied single monopolar stimulation mode (one contact on the electrode is negative) to either double monopolar stimulation (two -usually adjacent- negative contacts on the electrode are stimulated with same amplitude and pulse-width values) or bipolar stimulation mode (one contact on the electrode is positive) in case of unsatisfactory outcomes. Although these techniques had been utilized in multicenter trials, non-responsiveness to GPi-DBS did occur. Recently the investigators have reported in the Movement Disorders that the newly introduced interleaving stimulation mode was superior to single or double monopolar stimulation in four patients who had initially (6-12 months after implantation) limited response to GPi DBS.
Aims of the study:
To systematically compare the efficacy and the side-effect profile of double monopolar stimulation mode to those of interleaving stimulation mode in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, and cross-over study.
Methods:
The investigators would enroll 20-25 patients with drug refractory segmental or generalized primary dystonia undergoing bilateral GPi-DBS implantation within a 2-3 year time frame. The inclusion and exclusion criteria would follow those of the study of Kupsch et al.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Interleaving stimulation mode with constant frequency (125 Hz) and pulse-width (120us)parameters 'Interleavingr stimulation mode (Medtronic)'
Other names: Medtronic Activa RC Interleaving Stimulation Mode
Double monopolar stimulation mode with constant frequency (125 Hz) and pulse-width (120us)parameters 'Double monopolar stimulation mode (Medtronic)'
Other names: Medtronic Activa RC Double Monopolar Stimulation Mode
Time frame: 7 months
Differences in severity of dystonia measured by Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale
Time frame: 7 months
Differences in number of treatment responders (at least 25% improvement on Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale compared to baseline)
Time frame: 7 months
Differences in health-related quality of life measured by EQ-5D and SF-36 scales
Time frame: 7 months
Differences in side-effect profile measured by stuctured deep brain stimulation-related side-effect questionnaire
University of Pecs
Other
Comparison of the Efficacy of Double Monopolar Versus Interleaving Stimulation Modes for the Deep Brain Stimulation Treatment of Primary Generalized or Segmental Dystonia
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT01168388
Blepharospasm, Central Nervous System Diseases
Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
View Trial DetailsNCT04071847
Basal Ganglia Diseases, Brain Diseases
Tucson, Arizona, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02073630
Central Nervous System Diseases, Dystonic Disorders
Paris, France
View Trial DetailsNCT02689466
Central Nervous System Diseases, Cervical Dystonia
Bethesda, Maryland, United States
View Trial Details