Minimal Electrophysiology and Imaging Enhanced Deep Brain Stimulation

NCT ID: NCT06572150

Last Updated: 2025-02-12

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

80 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-10-31

Study Completion Date

2028-10-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The goal of this study is to learn if Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) surgery can be streamlined for patients being treated for Parkinson's disease. The main questions it aims to answer are:

* Can a streamlined DBS surgery protocol with minimal electrophysiology and imaging (MiXT) safely replace the current use of intraoperative electrophysiology?
* Are we able to improve the efficiency, lower the invasiveness, and improve the clinical outcomes for patients undergoing DBS surgery?

Researchers will compare patients undergoing DBS surgery with this streamlined protocol to patients who previously underwent DBS surgery with the standard protocol to see if the accuracy, clinical outcomes, and efficiency improve.

Participants will undergo the standard protocol for DBS work-up and follow-up, but with minimal intraoperative electrophysiological testing.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

In deep brain stimulation (DBS), accurate implantation of the stimulation electrode into the surgical target is crucial for a successful clinical outcome. The classic technique for surgical planning uses stereotactic atlases developed from a limited number of post-mortem samples. To better account for individual variability, imaging- and electrophysiology-based techniques have been developed. Electrophysiological techniques may offer intraoperative insight into anatomical positioning. Macrostimulation and microelectrode recording are gold-standards for simulating the therapeutic effects of stimulation during surgery, as well as predicting the threshold of stimulation-induced side effects. However, these techniques result in increased procedural time, reduced accuracy due to brain shift, and increased procedural risk due to the up to five electrode penetrations through brain tissue for testing. Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) deliver stimulation across the test and final implanted electrode to predict distance to the motor tract, and have been previously shown by our group to be an effective predictor of therapeutic threshold and side effects.

High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used to directly visualize target structures for individual patients, such as the subthalamic nucleus (STN), internal globus pallidus (GPi), and ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus (VIM). However, differentiating between the target and surrounding tissue is challenging for some surgical targets, and pre-surgical MRI may give imprecise coordinates of brain structures due to brain shift during surgery. Advances in machine learning have led to the development of software for assisting with detecting surgical targets from MRI images and for merging intraoperative images with the preoperative MRI images to represent the stereotactic space and verify the electrode position within the operating room setting.

Currently, our center uses MEPs, microelectrode recordings, and macrostimulation with software and intraoperative imaging plan and conduct DBS surgeries. Macrostimulation and microelectrode recordings may be redundant with the introduction of intraoperative MEP testing. This study aims to assess the safety, accuracy and clinical outcomes of using the streamlined procedure of MEP testing with imaging and assistive software only. This technique will be referred to as the MiXT technique.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Parkinson Disease

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Minimal Intraoperative Electrophysiology

Participants undergoing DBS for the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Deep Brain Stimulation - Minimal Electrophysiology

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Participants will undergo standard work-up and follow-up for DBS, but with minimal intraoperative electrophysiological testing.

Standard Intraoperative Electrophysiology

Participants who previously underwent DBS surgery for the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease

Group Type OTHER

Deep Brain Stimulation - Standard

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Participants underwent DBS surgery with standard intraoperative electrophysiological testing.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Deep Brain Stimulation - Minimal Electrophysiology

Participants will undergo standard work-up and follow-up for DBS, but with minimal intraoperative electrophysiological testing.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Deep Brain Stimulation - Standard

Participants underwent DBS surgery with standard intraoperative electrophysiological testing.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patient qualifying for deep brain stimulation for the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease
* Informed consent

Exclusion Criteria

* Lack of consent
* Electrical or other devices that preclude the performance of magnetic resonance imaging
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Nova Scotia Health Authority

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Lutz Weise, MD, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Nova Scotia Health Authority

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Queen Elizabeth Health Science Centre

Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Lutz Weise, MD, PhD

Role: CONTACT

902-473-6850

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

MIXT-DBS

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.