Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 8, 2026
Analysis of Gene Expression Changes in the Rat Hippocampus After Deep Brain Stimulation of the Anterior Thalamic Nucleus
Published on: March 8, 2015
Rechargeable or Nonrechargeable Deep Brain Stimulation in Dystonia: A Cost Analysis
Jerome Perez1,2,3,4,5, Victoria Gonzalez1,2,3,4,5,6, Laura Cif1,2,3,4,5,6
1Unité de Recherche sur les Comportements et Mouvements Anormaux, CHU Montpellier, France.
Objective:
Deep brain stimulation of the internal Globus Pallidus (GPi DBS) delivered by an implantable neurostimulator (INS) is an established, effective, and safe treatment option for patients with medically refractory primary dystonia. Compared to other DBS targets, the battery life of the INS is substantially shorter due to the higher energy demands required to penetrate the GPi resulting in faster battery depletion and more frequent hospitalizations for INS replacement. We, therefore, performed a cost analysis to compare a rechargeable DBS system, Activa®RC, with nonrechargeable systems, from the perspective of the French public health insurer.
Materials And Methods:
To estimate the cost of INS replacement in the nonrechargeable cohort, and costs potentially avoided in the hypothetical Activa® RC cohort, the medical records of patients who had undergone GPi DBS with a nonrechargeable INS between 1996 and 2010 at a center in France were accessed. Replacement rates were estimated for up to nine years.
Results:
With Activa® RC, a total of 315 hospitalizations for replacement procedures would have been avoided over nine years compared with a nonrechargeable INS, resulting in a discounted mean direct medical cost per patient over nine years of €50,119 with a nonrechargeable INS and €33,306 with Activa® RC, a reduction of 34%.
Conclusions:
The adoption of a rechargeable instead of a nonrechargeable INS for eligible patients with dystonia may provide substantial savings to the public health insurer in France.
