medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8559 (Electronic)
ISSN 1405-0625 (Print)

2011, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Cir Plast 2011; 21 (1)

Treatment of exposure of deep brain stimulation systems

Priego BR, Haddad TJL, Castillo CR

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 6-10
PDF size: 112.69 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Deep brain stimulation has applications in the treatment of epilepsy difficult to control and Parkinson disease. It is considered a process of minimum invasion; however, it is not exempt of complications, such as the exposure of any of the components of the deep brain stimulation system. Twenty one patients with exposure of any part of the deep brain stimulation system placed to treat epilepsy in 51.7% and Parkinson disease in 42.9% were studied. It was found that the sites of exposure are plug of the trepans 100%, electrode 33.2%, connector 4.7%, extension 14.2%, and generator 14.2%. The number of surgeries was 83: direct closure in 28, local flaps in 27, local flaps and milling of external table in 10, free flaps in 16, and pectoral flap in 2. The percentage of recurrence in each type of procedure was for direct closure 90%, local flaps 70.3%, local flap and milling 10%, free flaps 6%, and pectoral flap 50%. Thirty-three percent of the systems were withdrawn. Based on the treatments that were used, the placement technique and proposed changes are analyzed to reduce the risk of exposure of the system of deep brain stimulation.


REFERENCES

  1. Lozano A, Dostrovsky J, Chen R, Ashby P. Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease: disrupting the disruption. Lancet Neurol 2002; 1(4): 225-31.

  2. Oh MY, Abosch A, Kim SH, Lang AE, Lozano AM. Long term hardware-related complications of deep brain stimulation. Neurosurgery 2002; 50(6): 1268-1276.

  3. Ahlskog JE, Parkinson’s disease: medical and surgical treatment. Neurol Clin 2001; 19(3): 579-605.

  4. Greenberg B. Update on deep brain stimulation. J ECT 2002; 18(4): 193-6.

  5. Lyons KE, Wilkinson SB, Overman J, Pahwa R. Surgical and hardware complications of subthalamic stimulation: A series of 160 procedures. Neurology 2004; 63(4): 612-616.

  6. Beric A, Kelly PJ, Rezai A, Sterio D et al. Complications of deep brain surgery. Stereotact Func Neurosurg 2001; 77(1-4): 73-8.

  7. Rogers B et al. The surgical repair of traumatic defects of the scalp. Clin Plast Surg 1982; 9(2): 131-145.

  8. Goetz CG, Horn SS. Treatment of tremor and dystonia. Neurol Clin 2001; 19(1): 129-44.

  9. Lozano AM, Hamani C. The future of deep brain stimulation. J Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 21(1): 68-69.

  10. Blanchette A. Surgery for patients with Parkinson disease. Neurology 2004; 62(2): E6-E7.

  11. Vergani F, Landi A, Pirilo D, Cilia R, Antonini A, Sganzerla EP. Surgical, medical, and hardware adverse events in a series of 141 patients undergoing subthalamic deep brain stimulation for Parkinson disease. World Neurosurg 2010; 73(4): 338-44.

  12. McIntyre CC, Savasta M, Walter BL, Vitek JL. How does deep brain stimulation work? Present understanding and future questions. J Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 21(1): 40-50.

  13. Oh My. Deep brain stimulator electrodes used for lessoning: proof of principle. Neurosurg 2001; 49(2): 363-369.

  14. Volkmann J. Deep brain stimulation for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. J Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 21(1): 6-17.

  15. Lanotte M, Verna G. Panciani PP, Taveggia A, Zibetti M et al. Management of skin erosion following deep brain stimulation. Neurosurg Rev 2009; 32(1): 111-114.

  16. Peña E, Pastor J, Hernando V, Gallego I, Pedrosa M et al. Skin erosion over implants in deep brain stimulation patients. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2008; 86(2): 120-126.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com