Volker Tronnier

BACKGROUND: Neurostimulation of the subthalamic nucleus reduces levodopa-related motor complications in advanced Parkinson's disease. We compared this treatment plus medication with medical management. METHODS: In this randomized-pairs trial, we enrolled 156 patients with advanced Parkinson's disease and severe motor symptoms. The primary end points were the changes from baseline to six months in the quality of life, as assessed by the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), and the severity of symptoms without medication, according to the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, part III (UPDRS-III). RESULTS: Pairwise comparisons showed that neurostimulation, as compared with medication alone, caused greater improvements from baseline to six months in the PDQ-39 (50 of 78 pairs, P=0.02) and the UPDRS-III (55 of 78, P<0.001), with mean improvements of 9.5 and 19.6 points, respectively. Neurostimulation resulted in improvements of 24 to 38 percent in the PDQ-39 subscales for mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, and bodily discomfort. Serious adverse events were more common with neurostimulation than with medication alone (13 percent vs. 4 percent, P<0.04) and included a fatal intracerebral hemorrhage. The overall frequency of adverse events was higher in the medication group (64 percent vs. 50 percent, P=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: In this six-month study of patients under 75 years of age with severe motor complications of Parkinson's disease, neurostimulation of the subthalamic nucleus was more effective than medical management alone. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00196911 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

BACKGROUND: Neurostimulation of the internal globus pallidus has been shown to be effective in reducing symptoms of primary dystonia. We compared this surgical treatment with sham stimulation in a randomized, controlled clinical trial. METHODS: Forty patients with primary segmental or generalized dystonia received an implanted device for deep-brain stimulation and were randomly assigned to receive either neurostimulation or sham stimulation for 3 months. The primary end point was the change from baseline to 3 months in the severity of symptoms, according to the movement subscore on the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (range, 0 to 120, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). Two investigators who were unaware of treatment status assessed the severity of dystonia by reviewing videotaped sessions. Subsequently, all patients received open-label neurostimulation; blinded assessment was repeated after 6 months of active treatment. RESULTS: Three months after randomization, the change from baseline in the mean (+/-SD) movement score was significantly greater in the neurostimulation group (-15.8+/-14.1 points) than in the sham-stimulation group (-1.4+/-3.8 points, P<0.001). During the open-label extension period, this improvement was sustained among patients originally assigned to the neurostimulation group, and patients in the sham-stimulation group had a similar benefit when they switched to active treatment. The combined analysis of the entire cohort after 6 months of neurostimulation revealed substantial improvement in all movement symptoms (except speech and swallowing), the level of disability, and quality of life, as compared with baseline scores. A total of 22 adverse events occurred in 19 patients, including 4 infections at the stimulator site and 1 lead dislodgment. The most frequent adverse event was dysarthria. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral pallidal neurostimulation for 3 months was more effective than sham stimulation in patients with primary generalized or segmental dystonia. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00142259 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Neuropathic pain is accompanied by both positive and negative sensory signs. To explore the spectrum of sensory abnormalities, 1236 patients with a clinical diagnosis of neuropathic pain were assessed by quantitative sensory testing (QST) following the protocol of DFNS (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain), using both thermal and mechanical nociceptive as well as non-nociceptive stimuli. Data distributions showed a systematic shift to hyperalgesia for nociceptive, and to hypoesthesia for non-nociceptive parameters. Across all parameters, 92% of the patients presented at least one abnormality. Thermosensory or mechanical hypoesthesia (up to 41%) was more frequent than hypoalgesia (up to 18% for mechanical stimuli). Mechanical hyperalgesias occurred more often (blunt pressure: 36%, pinprick: 29%) than thermal hyperalgesias (cold: 19%, heat: 24%), dynamic mechanical allodynia (20%), paradoxical heat sensations (18%) or enhanced wind-up (13%). Hyperesthesia was less than 5%. Every single sensory abnormality occurred in each neurological syndrome, but with different frequencies: thermal and mechanical hyperalgesias were most frequent in complex regional pain syndrome and peripheral nerve injury, allodynia in postherpetic neuralgia. In postherpetic neuralgia and in central pain, subgroups showed either mechanical hyperalgesia or mechanical hypoalgesia. The most frequent combinations of gain and loss were mixed thermal/mechanical loss without hyperalgesia (central pain and polyneuropathy), mixed loss with mechanical hyperalgesia in peripheral neuropathies, mechanical hyperalgesia without any loss in trigeminal neuralgia. Thus, somatosensory profiles with different combinations of loss and gain are shared across the major neuropathic pain syndromes. The characterization of underlying mechanisms will be needed to make a mechanism-based classification feasible.