ABSTRACT
Deep brain stimulation targeting the posterior hypothalamus (pHyp-DBS) is being investigated as a treatment for refractory aggressive behavior, but its mechanisms of action remain elusive. We conducted an integrated imaging analysis of a large multi-centre dataset, incorporating volume of activated tissue modeling, probabilistic mapping, normative connectomics, and atlas-derived transcriptomics. Ninety-one percent of the patients responded positively to treatment, with a more striking improvement recorded in the pediatric population. Probabilistic mapping revealed an optimized surgical target within the posterior-inferior-lateral region of the posterior hypothalamic area. Normative connectomic analyses identified fiber tracts and functionally connected with brain areas associated with sensorimotor function, emotional regulation, and monoamine production. Functional connectivity between the target, periaqueductal gray and key limbic areas - together with patient age - were highly predictive of treatment outcome. Transcriptomic analysis showed that genes involved in mechanisms of aggressive behavior, neuronal communication, plasticity and neuroinflammation might underlie this functional network.
Subject(s)
Deep Brain Stimulation , Child , Humans , Deep Brain Stimulation/methods , Brain , Aggression/psychology , Hypothalamus, Posterior/physiology , Treatment Outcome , Magnetic Resonance ImagingABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a surgical technique used to manage aggression in patients who do not improve despite the use of appropriate drug treatment. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to assess the impact of DBS on aggressive behavior refractory to the pharmacological and behavioral treatment of patients with Intellectual Disabilities (ID). METHODS: A follow-up was conducted on a cohort of 12 patients with severe ID, undergoing DBS in posteromedial hypothalamic nuclei; evaluated with the Overt Aggression Scale (OAS), before the intervention, at 6, 12, and 18 months of medical follow-up. RESULTS: After the surgical procedure, there was a significant reduction in the aggressiveness of patients in the follow-up medical evaluation at 6 months (t = 10.14; p < 0.01), 12 months (t = 14.06; p < 0.01), and 18 months (t = 15.34; p < 0.01), respect to the initial measurement; with a very large effect size (6 months: d = 2.71; 12 months: d = 3.75; 18 months: d = 4.10). From 12 months onward, emotional control stabilized and is sustained at 18 months (t = 1.24; p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: DBS in posteromedial hypothalamic nuclei may be an effective treatment for the management of aggression in patients with ID refractory to pharmacological treatment.
Subject(s)
Deep Brain Stimulation , Intellectual Disability , Humans , Child , Intellectual Disability/therapy , Deep Brain Stimulation/methods , Hypothalamus , Treatment Outcome , Aggression/physiology , Aggression/psychologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may display extreme behaviors such as self-injury or aggression that often become refractory to psychopharmacology or behavioral intervention. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a surgical alternative that modulates brain circuits that have yet to be clearly elucidated. In the current study the authors performed a connectomic analysis to identify brain circuitry engaged by DBS for extreme behaviors associated with ASD. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify prior reports of DBS as a treatment for extreme behaviors in patients with ASD. Individual patients' perioperative imaging was collected from corresponding authors. DBS electrode localization and volume of tissue activated modeling were performed. Volumes of tissue activated were used as seed points in high-resolution normative functional and structural imaging templates. The resulting individual functional and structural connectivity maps were pooled to identify networks and pathways that are commonly engaged by all targets. RESULTS: Nine patients with ASD who were receiving DBS for symptoms of aggression or self-injurious behavior were identified. All patients had some clinical improvement with DBS. Connectomic analysis of 8 patients (from the systematic review and unpublished clinical data) demonstrated a common anatomical area of shared circuitry within the anterior limb of the internal capsule. Functional analysis of 4 patients identified a common network of distant brain areas including the amygdala, insula, and anterior cingulate engaged by DBS. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a comprehensive synopsis of the evidence for DBS in the treatment of extreme behaviors associated with ASD. Using network mapping, the authors identified key circuitry common to DBS targets.
ABSTRACT
Objetivos Analizar los resultados de la estimulación del nervio vago en pacientes con epilepsia fármaco-resistente con callosotomía previa. Material y métodos Se revisaron prospectivamente los datos de los pacientes con epilepsia fármaco-resistente que persistían con crisis incapacitantes tras la realización de callosotomía, en los cuales no fue posible identificar un foco epileptogénico, por lo que fueron tratados posteriormente con estimulación del nervio vago. Se analizaron las variables: edad, género, etiología de la epilepsia, frecuencia y características de las crisis y clasificación según la escala de Engel antes y después del implante del estimulador vagal. Asimismo, se calcularon las diferencias porcentuales del cambio de la frecuencia de las crisis. Resultados Se identificaron 4 pacientes: 2 de género masculino y 2 de género femenino. La frecuencia (..) (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Vagus Nerve Stimulation/methods , Corpus Callosum/surgery , Epilepsy/surgery , Drug Resistance , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the results of vagus nerve stimulation in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy and previous corpus callosotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively reviewed data from patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who showed persistence of disabling seizures after undergoing corpus callosotomy, in whom it was not possible to identify an epileptogenic focus and who were subsequently treated with vagus nerve stimulation. Variables analysed included: age, gender, aetiology of epilepsy, frequency and characteristics of the crises and Engel scale classification, before and after vagal stimulator implant. Furthermore, the percentage differences in seizure frequency changes were also calculated. RESULTS: Four patients were identified: two male and two female. The total seizure frequency had decreased between 20% and 81% after corpus callosotomy in three patients and one of them did not show any favourable response (Engel IVB). Following implantation of the stimulator they became reduced to between 57% and 100% after a mean follow-up period of 8.3 months (range: 3 to 12 months). Generalised seizures decreased between 71.4% and 100%, and focal seizures between 57.7% and 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Vagus nerve stimulation therapy proved to be an alternative for the reduction of seizure frequency in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who suffered disabling seizures despite undergoing corpus callosotomy as primary surgery.
