Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 13, 2025

Controlling Parkinson's Disease With Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation
Published on: July 16, 2014
Acute effects of adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's disease
Dan Piña-Fuentes1, J Marc C van Dijk2, Jonathan C van Zijl3
1Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, the Netherlands; Medical Research Council Brain Network Dynamics Unit at the University of Oxford, United Kingdom; Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom; Department of Neurology, Amsterdam Neuroscience Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlans.
Background:
Beta-based adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation (aDBS) is effective in Parkinson's disease (PD), when assessed in the immediate post-implantation phase. However, the potential benefits of aDBS in patients with electrodes chronically implanted, in whom changes due to the microlesion effect have disappeared, are yet to be assessed.
Methods:
To determine the acute effectiveness and side-effect profile of aDBS in PD compared to conventional continuous DBS (cDBS) and no stimulation (NoStim), years after DBS implantation, 13 PD patients undergoing battery replacement were pseudo-randomised in a crossover fashion, into three conditions (NoStim, aDBS or cDBS), with a 2-min interval between them. Patient videos were blindly evaluated using a short version of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (subUPDRS), and the Speech Intelligibility Test (SIT).
Results:
Mean disease duration was 16 years, and the mean time since DBS-implantation was 6.9 years. subUPDRS scores (11 patients tested) were significantly lower both in aDBS (p=<.001), and cDBS (p = .001), when compared to NoStim. Bradykinesia subscores were significantly lower in aDBS (p = .002), and did not achieve significance during cDBS (p = .08), when compared to NoStim. Two patients demonstrated re-emerging tremor during aDBS. SIT scores of patients who presented stimulation-induced dysarthria significantly worsened in cDBS (p = .009), but not in aDBS (p = .407), when compared to NoStim. Overall, stimulation was applied 48.8% of the time during aDBS.
Conclusion:
Beta-based aDBS is effective in PD patients with bradykinetic phenotypes, delivers less stimulation than cDBS, and potentially has a more favourable speech side-effect profile. Patients with prominent tremor may require a modified adaptive strategy.
More Related Videos
06:32Author Spotlight: Automated Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease - Exploring the Possibilities and Challenges of Home Monitoring
Published on: July 14, 2023
07:14A Novel Approach to Assess Motor Outcome of Deep Brain Stimulation Effects in the Hemiparkinsonian Rat: Staircase and Cylinder Test
Published on: May 31, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Parkinson's Disease: Treatment
Parkinson's Disease is primarily a result of the loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta. The cornerstone of...
Parkinson's Disease: Overview