MER and increased operative time are not risk factors for the formation of pneumocephalus during DBS.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 06 2023
08 06 2023
Historique:
received:
20
10
2022
accepted:
21
02
2023
medline:
12
6
2023
pubmed:
9
6
2023
entrez:
8
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although only recently directional leads have proven their potential to compensate for sub-optimally placed electrodes, optimal lead positioning remains the most critical factor in determining Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) outcome. Pneumocephalus is a recognized source of error, but the factors that contribute to its formation are still a matter of debate. Among these, operative time is one of the most controversial. Because cases of DBS performed with Microelectrode Recordings (MER) are affected by an increase in surgical length, it is useful to analyze whether MER places patients at risk for increased intracranial air entry. Data of 94 patients from two different institutes who underwent DBS for different neurologic and psychiatric conditions were analyzed for the presence of postoperative pneumocephalus. Operative time and use of MER, as well as other potential risk factors for pneumocephalus (age, awake vs. asleep surgery, number of MER passages, burr hole size, target and unilateral vs. bilateral implants) were examined. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were utilized to compare intracranial air distributions across groups of categorical variables. Partial correlations were used to assess the association between time and volume. A generalized linear model was created to predict the effects of time and MER on the volume of intracranial air, controlling for other potential risk factors identified: age, number of MER passages, awake vs. asleep surgery, burr hole size, target, unilateral vs. bilateral surgery. Significantly different distributions of air volume were noted between different targets, unilateral vs. bilateral implants, and number of MER trajectories. Patients undergoing DBS with MER did not present a significant increase in pneumocephalus compared to patients operated without (p = 0.067). No significant correlation was found between pneumocephalus and time. Using multivariate analysis, unilateral implants exhibited lower volumes of pneumocephalus (p = 0.002). Two specific targets exhibited significantly different volumes of pneumocephalus: the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis with lower volumes (p < 0.001) and the posterior hypothalamus with higher volumes (p = 0.011). MER, time, and other parameters analyzed failed to reach statistical significance. Operative time and use of intraoperative MER are not significant predictors of pneumocephalus during DBS. Air entry is greater for bilateral surgeries and may be also influenced by the specific stimulated target.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37291256
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-30289-5
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-30289-5
pmc: PMC10250399
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
9324Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Neuromodulation. 2008 Oct;11(4):302-10
pubmed: 22151145
Neurosurg Focus. 2010 Aug;29(2):E13
pubmed: 20672915
Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2011 Nov;72(4):181-5
pubmed: 21739410
Arch Neurol. 2005 Aug;62(8):1250-5
pubmed: 15956104
Lancet Neurol. 2004 Dec;3(12):719-28
pubmed: 15556804
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2021 Jan;163(1):169-175
pubmed: 33174114
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2021;99(1):65-74
pubmed: 33080600
Mov Disord. 2006 Jun;21 Suppl 14:S247-58
pubmed: 16810722
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2018;96(2):83-90
pubmed: 29847829
Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2016 Dec;33:72-77
pubmed: 27645504
Neurology. 2014 Sep 23;83(13):1163-9
pubmed: 25150285
Brain. 2014 Jul;137(Pt 7):2015-26
pubmed: 24844728
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007 Dec;78(12):1314-9
pubmed: 17442760
Neurosurgery. 2010 Jul;67(1):49-53; discussion 53-4
pubmed: 20559091
J Neuroradiol. 2016 Dec;43(6):384-391
pubmed: 27720265
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2008;86(1):44-53
pubmed: 17881888
Neurosurg Rev. 2020 Feb;43(1):95-99
pubmed: 31897886
Brain Stimul. 2018 Mar - Apr;11(2):445-453
pubmed: 29246748
Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2015;55(5):416-21
pubmed: 25925757
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2008;86(1):37-43
pubmed: 17881887
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2011;89(4):246-52
pubmed: 21778795
Neurosurgery. 2010 Sep;67(3 Suppl Operative):ons213-21; discussion ons221
pubmed: 20679927
J Neurosurg. 2007 Nov;107(5):989-97
pubmed: 17977272
J Neurosurg. 2007 Nov;107(5):983-8
pubmed: 17977271
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2009;87(5):322-9
pubmed: 19713732
Behav Brain Res. 2019 Feb 1;359:266-273
pubmed: 30414974
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005 Aug;76(8):1161-3
pubmed: 16024899
Neurosurgery. 2016 Jan;78(1):91-100
pubmed: 26348012
JAMA Neurol. 2021 Oct 1;78(10):1212-1219
pubmed: 34491267
Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2016;94(6):351-362
pubmed: 27784015
Neuromodulation. 2015 Oct;18(7):574-8; discussion 578-9
pubmed: 26222380
Neurosurgery. 2000 Nov;47(5):1070-9; discussion 1079-80
pubmed: 11063099
Neurosurgery. 2013 Oct;73(4):681-8; discussion 188
pubmed: 23842551
Nat Rev Neurol. 2014 May;10(5):261-70
pubmed: 24709892
J Neurosurg. 2000 Apr;92(4):615-25
pubmed: 10761650
Turk Neurosurg. 2019;29(5):677-682
pubmed: 30806475
Ann Biomed Eng. 2013 Feb;41(2):293-304
pubmed: 23010803
Mov Disord. 2006 Jun;21 Suppl 14:S284-9
pubmed: 16810675
J Neurosurg. 2015 Jan;122(1):191-4
pubmed: 25361490
Anesth Analg. 1986 Jan;65(1):65-70
pubmed: 3455673
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2021 Jan;163(1):177-184
pubmed: 32960362