• Guohui Lu, Linfeng Luo, Maolin Liu, Zijian Zheng, Bohan Zhang, Xiaosi Chen, Xing Hua, Houyou Fan, Guoheng Mo, Jian Duan, MeiHua Li, Tao Hong, and Dongwei Zhou.
• Department of Neurosurgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China.
• Neural Plast. 2020 Jan 1; 2020: 2486065.

ObjectiveThis study was aimed at identifying the potential outcome predictors, comparing the efficacy in patients with different tremor characteristics, and summarizing the adverse effect rates (AERs) of deep brain stimulation on the ventral intermediate nucleus (VIM-DBS) for essential tremor (ET).MethodsAn extensive search of articles published to date in 2019 was conducted, and two main aspects were analyzed. Improvement was calculated as a percentage of change in any objective tremor rating scale (TRS) and analyzed by subgroup analyses of patients' tremor characteristics, laterality, and stimulation parameters. Furthermore, the AERs were analyzed as follows: the adverse effects (AEs) were classified as stimulation-related, surgical-related, or device-related effects. A simple regression analysis was used to identify the potential prognostic factors, and a two-sample mean-comparison test was used to verify the statistical significance of the subgroup analyses.ResultsForty-six articles involving 1714 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled improvement in any objective TRS score was 61.3% (95% CI: 0.564-0.660) at the mean follow-up visit (20.0 ± 17.3 months). The midline and extremity symptoms showed consistent improvement (P = 0.440), and the results of the comparison of postural and kinetic tremor were the same (P = 0.219). In addition, the improvement in rest tremor was similar to that in action tremor (OR = 2.759, P = 0.120). In the simple regression analysis, the preoperative Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (FTM-TRS) scores and follow-up time were negatively correlated with the percentage change in any objective TRS score (P < 0.05). The most common adverse event was dysarthria (10.5%), which is a stimulation-related AE (23.6%), while the rates of the surgical-related and device-related AEs were 6.4% and 11.5%, respectively.ConclusionVIM-DBS is an efficient and safe surgical method in ET, and the efficacy was not affected by the body distribution of tremor, age at surgery, and disease duration. Lower preoperative FTM-TRS scores likely indicate greater improvement, and the effect of VIM-DBS declines over time.Copyright © 2020 Guohui Lu et al.

11 keywords...

hide…