Assessment of lmage-guided Programming (IGP) on Bilateral STN and GPi Deep Brain Stimulation Programming Time
Jason Aldred1, Theresa Zesiewicz2, Michael Okun3, Juan Ramirez Castaneda4, Leonard Verhagen Metman5, Corneliu Luca6, Ritesh Ramdhani7, Jennifer Durphy8, Yarema Bezchlibnyk2, Jonathan Carlson9, Kelly Foote10, Sepehr Sani11, Alexander Papanastassiou12, Jonathan Jagid13, David Weintraub14, Julie Pilitsis15, Ben Reese16, Lilly Chen16, Rajat Shivacharan17, Edward Goldberg17
1Selkirk Neurology, 2University of South Florida, 3University of Florida Fixel Institute of Neurological Diseases, 4Methodist Physicians. Neurosurgery and Neurology Specialists, 5Northwestern University, 6University of Miami, 7Northwell Health, 8Albany Medical Center, 9Inland Neurosurgery and Spine, 10University of Florida, 11Rush University Medical Center, 12University of Texas, San Antonio, 13University of Miami School of Medicine, 14Nassau University Medical Center, 15Florida Atlantic University, 16Boston Scientific Neuromodulation, 17Boston Scientific
Objective:

Assessment of Parkinson's disease (PD) patient outcomes using an image-guided programming (IGP) applied during initial deep brain stimulation (DBS) programming, either with STN or GPi as brain target.

Background:

Optimization of DBS programming can be a lengthy, empirical trial-and-error process potentially leading to extended programming sessions and frequent visits. An IGP-based platform can help visualize lead location relative to anatomy with capability of reducing programming times and aiding active contact(s) selection through direct visualization and targeting of Stimulation Field Models (SFMs).

Design/Methods:
Novel IGP software (GUIDE XT, Boston Scientific) was evaluated from an ongoing prospective, multicenter, registry (NCT02071134) in which preoperative MRI and post-operative CT scans were provided to localize the DBS lead relative to each subject's anatomy and to select programming parameters per alignment with SFMs. Time to reach effective DBS settings during the initial programming session was collected, along with device-aided suggested stimulation settings.
Results:

To date, 57-subjects (mean age 62.9-years, 77% male) with 10.1-years of disease duration have been enrolled. Initial programming sessions (post-implant), where IGP provided settings for directional leads, lasted 39.4±4.4 minutes (mean ± SE). Fifty-five percent (31/56) completed initial programming of bilateral directional leads with the IGP in <30-minutes. Motor function (mean MDS­UPDRS Ill scores [Meds OFF]) was significantly improved by 55% (n=45) and 45% (n=37) at 6-and 12-months, respectively. Of 21 patients for whom follow-up programming information out to 6- and 12-months was available, 52% and 43% of DBS programs remained unchanged from initial setting (i.e., no change in active contact(s) and cathodic/anodic distribution of current), respectively, as suggested by IGP.

Conclusions:

These results indicate that use of this tool is associated with rapid initial programming sessions and clinically significant motor improvement. Though optimization was subjective in this evaluation, and there was no control group, this tool revealed promising time-based and motor outcomes.

10.1212/WNL.0000000000204553