Rosenow, Joshua M.

Since its US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2016, magnetic resonance–guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) thalamotomy has grown into one of the procedures of choice among patients with essential tremor (ET). Approved applications for the procedure have expanded over time from unilateral thalamotomy to treat ET and Parkinson disease tremor to bilateral staged thalamotomy for ET. As the procedure expands to healthcare environments beyond large academic centers, guidance is required to ensure that the responsible clinicians are appropriately trained to undertake this operative procedure. Although multidisciplinary movement disorder teams are important for the optimal management of patients, MRgFUS lesions are inherently surgical interventions. Neurosurgeons are trained to evaluate these patients, consider surgical alternatives and conduct these operations, particularly after completing a fellowship in the subspecialty of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery. At present, all high-level evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of MRgFUS lesions to treat movement disorders derives from procedures performed by neurosurgeons, so those results may not be generalizable to other physicians. Based on these considerations and potential liability issues, the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery, which acts as the joint section representing the field of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery on behalf of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, puts forth this position statement that only neurosurgeons appropriately trained to conduct functional neurosurgery procedures should conduct MRgFUS surgical lesions.

OBJECTIVE Magnetic resonance–guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) thalamotomy has become a popular tool in the neurosurgical armamentarium for managing tremor in patients with essential tremor (ET) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). METHODS Given the recent exponential growth in the use of this technology, the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery, which acts as the joint section representing the field of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery on behalf of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, provides an update on treatment indications and the efficacy and safety of MRgFUS for the treatment of tremor. RESULTS In ET, the efficacy of MRgFUS thalamotomy is supported by several open-label and 1 prospective, double-blind, sham-controlled randomized clinical trial (RCT) that showed a 47% improvement in hand tremor in the short term. Follow-up studies demonstrated that the benefits of MRgFUS for ET are sustained in the long term. Studies investigating the effects of bilateral staged MRgFUS thalamotomy in patients with ET have shown that tremor improvement on the second side was as significant as that observed after the first procedure. The efficacy of MRgFUS thalamotomy for PD tremor is supported by a systematic meta-analysis that consisted predominantly of smaller, nonrandomized studies; 1 RCT; and 1 prospective cohort study. Despite a significant short-term improvement in PD tremor, the long-term effects of this therapy remain unknown. Common early adverse effects of MRgFUS thalamotomy include gait disturbance and paresthesias. These, however, tend to subside over time. Other reported side effects are dysarthria, ataxia, taste disturbance, motor deficits, and speech difficulty. CONCLUSIONS MRgFUS thalamotomy is a safe, effective, and durable intervention for refractory ET in appropriately selected patients. The procedure appears to be safe and effective for PD tremor, although the long-term durability of the technique remains a concern. Early experience with bilateral staged lesions for ET suggests the procedure to be safe and effective.

Brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is a common and debilitating symptom of central nervous system (CNS) tumors. The epileptogenic zone, defined as cortex responsible for seizure generation, is located at the peritumoral region for most tumors, and lower-grade intrinsic brain tumors have the highest seizure incidence. Surgery is often the most effective treatment for the reduction in seizures in BTRE. However, surgical decisions have historically often been made exclusively for oncologic reasons, with less emphasis on seizure control. Surgical approaches for all tumor types are reviewed, highlighting relevant risk factors. Adjunctive tools during surgery, such as intraoperative electrocorticography (ECoG), may help identify and remove surrounding brain areas which are epileptogenic. Minimally invasive surgery is also gaining traction, given its utility in treating seizures deep-seated tumors. This review explores epileptogenic brain tumors, surgery for BTRE, and emerging strategies to better achieve seizure control.

Importance The Implantable Neurostimulator for the Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease (INTREPID) trial was a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study of subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) for the treatment of Parkinson disease (PD). Objective To evaluate the long-term (5-year) outcomes and safety of STN-DBS for PD. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a prospective, randomized (3:1), 12-week double-blind sham-controlled study at 23 movement disorder centers across the US with an open-label 5-year follow-up. Patients were implanted and followed up with the Vercise DBS system from May 2013 to December 2022. Eligibility required diagnosis of bilateral idiopathic PD with more than 5 years of motor symptoms, more than 6 hours per day of poor motor function, modified Hoehn and Yahr Scale scores higher than 2, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III) score of 30 or higher (medication-off state), and 33% or higher improvement in UPDRS-III medication-on score. Intervention Bilateral STN-DBS for moderate to advanced PD. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes included changes in UPDRS and dyskinesia scores, quality-of-life measures, and safety assessments. Exploratory analyses included medication reduction and DBS association with motor signs. Results A total of 313 patients were enrolled with 191 receiving the DBS system, and 137 participants (72%) completed the study. The study population had a mean (SD) age of 60 (7.9) years, with 139 (73%) male participants. Motor function without medication as measured by UPDRS-III improved from a mean (SD) of 42.8 (9.4) to 21.1 (10.6) at year 1 (51%; 95% CI, 49%-53%; P < .001) and 27.6 (11.6) at year 5 (36%; 95% CI, 33%-38%; P < .001). Activities of daily living without medication as measured by UPDRS-II improved from a mean (SD) of 20.6 (6.0) to 12.4 (6.1) at year 1 (41%; 95% CI, 38%-42%; P < .001) and 16.4 (6.5) at year 5 (22%; 95% CI, 18%-23%; P < .001). Dyskinesia scores decreased from 4.0 (5.1) to 1.0 (2.1) at year 1 (75%; 95% CI, 73%-75%; P < .001) and to 1.2 (2.1) at year 5 (70%; 95% CI, 63%-75%; P < .001). The levodopa equivalent dose was reduced by 28% at year 1, remaining stable at year 5 (28%; 95% CI, 26%-31%; P < .001). The most common serious adverse event was infection (9 participants). Ten deaths were reported, none related to the study. Conclusions and Relevance Although STN-DBS outcomes declined slightly, possibly due to the progressive nature of the disease, patients with PD sustained significant improvement in motor and activities of daily living scores, along with a stable reduction in anti-parkinsonian medication over the 5-year follow-up period.

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has demonstrated effectiveness for neuropathic pain. Unfortunately, some patients report inadequate long-term pain relief. Patient selection is emphasized for this therapy; however, the prognostic capabilities and deployment strategies of existing selection techniques, including an SCS trial, have been questioned. After approval by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, a steering committee was formed to develop evidence-based guidelines for patient selection and the role of an SCS trial. Representatives of professional organizations with clinical expertize were invited to participate as committee members. A comprehensive literature review was carried out by the steering committee, and the results organized into narrative reports, which were circulated to all the committee members. Individual statements and recommendations within each of seven sections were formulated by the steering committee and circulated to members for voting. We used a modified Delphi method wherein drafts were circulated to each member in a blinded fashion for voting. Comments were incorporated in the subsequent revisions, which were recirculated for voting to achieve consensus. Seven sections with a total of 39 recommendations were approved with 100% consensus from all the members. Sections included definitions and terminology of SCS trial; benefits of SCS trial; screening for psychosocial characteristics; patient perceptions on SCS therapy and the use of trial; other patient predictors of SCS therapy; conduct of SCS trials; and evaluation of SCS trials including minimum criteria for success. Recommendations included that SCS trial should be performed before a definitive SCS implant except in anginal pain (grade B). All patients must be screened with an objective validated instrument for psychosocial factors, and this must include depression (grade B). Despite some limitations, a trial helps patient selection and provides patients with an opportunity to experience the therapy. These recommendations are expected to guide practicing physicians and other stakeholders and should not be mistaken as practice standards. Physicians should continue to make their best judgment based on individual patient considerations and preferences.

Abstract As neurological surgery evolved into its own subspecialty early in the 20th century, a need arose to create an environment for communication and education among those surgeons working in this burgeoning surgical discipline. As the socioeconomic climate in health care began to change in the United States, an unforeseen need arose that was outside the scope of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, Congress of Neurological Surgeons, and Society of Neurological Surgeons. The capacity to understand and address the evolving socioeconomic landscape and to offer a platform for advocacy required a new entity. Grassroots efforts of neurosurgeons at the state level ultimately yielded a formal organization of state neurosurgical societies to fill this void by recognizing, understanding, and addressing socioeconomic factors affecting the practice of neurological surgery. This formal organization became the Council of State Neurosurgical Societies (CSNS). The CSNS provides a forum in which state societies can meet to identify, understand, and advocate for policies on behalf of organized neurosurgery. The purpose of this paper is to detail the history of the formation of the CSNS. By understanding this history and the need for the development of the CSNS, it is hoped that its evolving role as a voice for neurological surgeons in the modern era of health care will be made clear.