Brain Modulation Lab, Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 02114, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Brain Circuit Therapeutics Department of Neurology Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Movement Disorder and Neuromodulation Unit, Department of Neurology, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Neurotherapeutics. 2024 Apr;21(3):e00313. doi: 10.1016/j.neurot.2023.e00313. Epub 2024 Jan 8.
The advent of next-generation technology has significantly advanced the implementation and delivery of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) for Essential Tremor (ET), yet controversies persist regarding optimal targets and networks responsible for tremor genesis and suppression. This review consolidates key insights from anatomy, neurology, electrophysiology, and radiology to summarize the current state-of-the-art in DBS for ET. We explore the role of the thalamus in motor function and describe how differences in parcellations and nomenclature have shaped our understanding of the neuroanatomical substrates associated with optimal outcomes. Subsequently, we discuss how seminal studies have propagated the ventral intermediate nucleus (Vim)-centric view of DBS effects and shaped the ongoing debate over thalamic DBS versus stimulation in the posterior subthalamic area (PSA) in ET. We then describe probabilistic- and network-mapping studies instrumental in identifying the local and network substrates subserving tremor control, which suggest that the PSA is the optimal DBS target for tremor suppression in ET. Taken together, DBS offers promising outcomes for ET, with the PSA emerging as a better target for suppression of tremor symptoms. While advanced imaging techniques have substantially improved the identification of anatomical targets within this region, uncertainties persist regarding the distinct anatomical substrates involved in optimal tremor control. Inconsistent subdivisions and nomenclature of motor areas and other subdivisions in the thalamus further obfuscate the interpretation of stimulation results. While loss of benefit and habituation to DBS remain challenging in some patients, refined DBS techniques and closed-loop paradigms may eventually overcome these limitations.
下一代技术的出现极大地推动了深部脑刺激(DBS)在原发性震颤(ET)中的实施和应用,但关于负责震颤发生和抑制的最佳靶点和网络仍存在争议。这篇综述综合了解剖学、神经病学、电生理学和放射学的关键见解,总结了 DBS 在 ET 中的最新进展。我们探讨了丘脑在运动功能中的作用,并描述了如何通过分区和命名法的差异来塑造我们对与最佳结果相关的神经解剖学基础的理解。随后,我们讨论了如何通过开创性的研究传播 DBS 效应的腹侧中间核(Vim)中心观点,并塑造了关于 ET 中丘脑 DBS 与后丘脑下核(PSA)刺激的持续争论。然后,我们描述了有助于识别控制震颤的局部和网络基础的概率和网络映射研究,这些研究表明 PSA 是 ET 中抑制震颤的最佳 DBS 靶点。综上所述,DBS 为 ET 提供了有前景的结果,PSA 作为抑制震颤症状的更好靶点出现。虽然先进的成像技术大大提高了对该区域内解剖靶点的识别,但在涉及最佳震颤控制的不同解剖学基础方面仍存在不确定性。运动区域和丘脑其他分区的不一致分区和命名法进一步混淆了对刺激结果的解释。尽管在一些患者中,DBS 的获益丧失和适应仍然具有挑战性,但改进的 DBS 技术和闭环范式最终可能克服这些限制。