Cited by 1,374Neurological disorders and treatmentsObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies

Adaptive deep brain stimulation in advanced Parkinson disease.

Open access
Little, Simon, Pogosyan, Alex, Neal, Spencer, Zavala, Baltazar, Zrinzo, Ludvic, Hariz, Marwan, Foltynie, Thomas, Limousin, Patricia +5 more·2013·Annals of Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) could potentially be used to interact with pathological brain signals to intervene and ameliorate their effects in disease states. Here, we provide proof-of-principle of this approach by using a BCI to interpret pathological brain activity in patients with advanced Parkinson disease (PD) and to use this feedback to control when therapeutic deep brain stimulation (DBS) is delivered. Our goal was to demonstrate that by personalizing and optimizing stimulation in real time, we could improve on both the efficacy and efficiency of conventional continuous DBS. METHODS: We tested BCI-controlled adaptive DBS (aDBS) of the subthalamic nucleus in 8 PD patients. Feedback was provided by processing of the local field potentials recorded directly from the stimulation electrodes. The results were compared to no stimulation, conventional continuous stimulation (cDBS), and random intermittent stimulation. Both unblinded and blinded clinical assessments of motor effect were performed using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. RESULTS: Motor scores improved by 66% (unblinded) and 50% (blinded) during aDBS, which were 29% (p = 0.03) and 27% (p = 0.005) better than cDBS, respectively. These improvements were achieved with a 56% reduction in stimulation time compared to cDBS, and a corresponding reduction in energy requirements (p < 0.001). aDBS was also more effective than no stimulation and random intermittent stimulation. INTERPRETATION: BCI-controlled DBS is tractable and can be more efficient and efficacious than conventional continuous neuromodulation for PD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ana.23951

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The outcome of brain stimulation to treat Parkinson's disease can be improved by recording brain activity and stimulating only when the local field potentials collected by electrodes inserted in the subthalamic nucleus exceed a certain threshold.

    “Furthermore, it has been shown that the outcome of brain stimulation to treat Parkinson’s disease can be improved by recording brain activity and stimulating only when the local field potentials collected by electrodes inserted in the subthalamic nucleus exceed a certain threshold (Little et al., 2013)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Little, S., Pogosyan, A., Neal, S., Zavala, B., Zrinzo, L., Hariz, M., Foltynie, T., Limousin, P., Ashkan, K., FitzGerald, J., Green, A. L., Aziz, T. Z., & Brown, P.
Affiliations
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
  • Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital University of Oxford Oxford
  • UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
  • King's College Hospital (GB)
Venue
Annals of Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-07-12
Volume
74
Issue
3
Pages
449-457
ISSN
  • 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-8249
OpenAlex
W2143685192
Cited by
1,374
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 131 · 2025: 123 · 2024: 113 · 2023: 114 · 2022: 106 · 2021: 116 · 2020: 118 · 2019: 92 · 2018: 111 · 2017: 103 · 2016: 93 · 2015: 76 · 2014: 64 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 1
FWCI
51.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Keywords
adaptive deep brain stimulation, Parkinson's disease, brain-computer interface, subthalamic nucleus, local field potentials, intermittent stimulation, stimulation efficiency, energy consumption reduction, motor symptoms, neuromodulation
MeSH terms
Aged, Antiparkinson Agents, Humans, Middle Aged, Parkinson Disease, Treatment Outcome, Subthalamic Nucleus, Deep Brain Stimulation, Brain-Computer Interfaces

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review