Carvalho, Diego Z.

Abstract Background Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a prevalent sensorimotor disorder that can dramatically impair sleep quality, daytime function, and quality of life. Although many patients benefit from standard pharmacological therapy, some patients suffer from insufficient treatment response or medication intolerance. Novel treatment approaches are therefore necessary. Objective Given the overlap between RLS and pain syndromes in both pathophysiological mechanisms and certain treatment options, we aimed to perform a scoping review of the available evidence on spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for RLS and discuss potential mechanistic implications. Methods We identified a total of 16 cases of patients with RLS who underwent SCS, all from case reports or case series. Discussion The published evidence is insufficient to assess SCS efficacy in patients with RLS, but SCS remains a promising investigational therapy in RLS on the basis of its potential mitigatory effects in the central hyperexcitability of the sensorimotor cortex through neuromodulation of spinal, subcortical, and cortical areas. A call for further research in this field is presented, with suggestions for future directions and trial designs.

Abstract Objective Advanced Parkinson's Disease (PD) is associated with Parkinson’s Disease gait impairment (PDg), which increases the risk for falls and is often treatment-refractory. Subthalamic nucleus (STN) and globus pallidus pars interna (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) often fails to improve axial symptoms like PDg. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been suggested to improve PDg. SCS may benefit PDg by disrupting pathologic beta-oscillations and hypersynchrony in cortico-striatal-thalamic circuits to override excessive inhibition of brainstem locomotor regions. SCS may potentially improve locomotion by acting at any of these levels, either alone or in combination. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search and scoping review, identifying 106 patients in whom SCS was evaluated for PDg. Results Among the identified patients, 63% carried a pain diagnosis. Overall, the most common stimulation location was thoracic (78%), most commonly T9-T10. Burst (sub-perception) was the most common stimulation modality (59%). Prior treatment with DBS was used in 25%. Motor outcomes were assessed by the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) III-motor, UPDRS, the Timed Up and Go (TUG), and/or 10-/20-meter walking tests. Among these patients, 95 (90%) had PDg amelioration and improved motor outcomes. Conclusions Despite small sample sizes, patient heterogeneity, and unblinded evaluations complicating interpretations of efficacy and safety, SCS may be beneficial for at least a subset of PDg. Further research is required to clarify the role of SCS for PDg and the patients most suitable to benefit from this intervention.

Abstract Introduction Restless legs syndrome (RLS) can dramatically impair sleep quality and quality of life. Some patients have insufficient treatment response or intolerance to available pharmacological options. Exploration of novel therapeutic approaches is needed. Methods We report a case of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) providing benefit in RLS. We also performed a scoping review of SCS in RLS with comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Scopus. Results A 77-year-old woman with DM2, OSA (on ASV), depression, familial RLS and iron deficiency with typical RLS symptoms for all of her adult life presented for management in 2000. In 2011 she developed intractable painful peripheral neuropathy and chronic back pain. Levodopa, pramipexole, oral/intravenous iron, gabapentin, pregabalin, tramadol, oxycodone, and methadone were ineffective or poorly tolerated. A 7-day percutaneous SCS trial resulted in RLS symptoms improvement initially by 50%. A Medtronic stimulator with lead placement at T8-T9 was implanted. 6 months later, the patient toggled between a tonic program (2.1-4.6 mA, 200 us, 50 Hz) and a sub-perception, differential target multiplexed program duty-cycled to 1:2 on:off (3.7 mA, 170 us, 300 Hz). She reported 75% improvement in RLS symptoms. Pain improved by 50%. Total daily dose of Oral Morphine Equivalents was reduced from 48.75mg/day to 37.5mg/day, with a stable once daily dose of 400 mg gabapentin at night. Uninterrupted sleep went from 2-5 hours to 6 hours. RLS worsened when the device was off. Our case corroborates the current evidence of benefit of SCS for RLS from the literature. We identified other 16 unique patients from case reports and series who had undergone SCS for RLS. Leads were most often implanted in mid or low thoracic levels. Stimulation waveforms were high frequency in 4 patients, tonic in 3 patients, burst stimulation in 1 patient, and undescribed in the others. All patients had RLS symptom reduction. Comorbid pain was reported in 14 patients, which also improved with SCS. Complication with lead erosion was reported in one case. Conclusion SCS remains a promising therapeutic approach for refractory RLS that deserves further investigation. SCS may reduce hyperexcitability seen in RLS by modulating dysfunctional spinal, subcortical, and cortical networks. Support (if any)

Low frequency brain rhythms facilitate communication across large spatial regions in the brain and high frequency rhythms are thought to signify local processing among nearby assemblies. A heavily investigated mode by which these low frequency and high frequency phenomenon interact is phase-amplitude coupling (PAC). This phenomenon has recently shown promise as a novel electrophysiologic biomarker, in a number of neurologic diseases including human epilepsy. In 17 medically refractory epilepsy patients undergoing phase-2 monitoring for the evaluation of surgical resection and in whom temporal depth electrodes were implanted, we investigated the electrophysiologic relationships of PAC in epileptogenic (seizure onset zone or SOZ) and non-epileptogenic tissue (non-SOZ). That this biomarker can differentiate seizure onset zone from non-seizure onset zone has been established with ictal and pre-ictal data, but less so with interictal data. Here we show that this biomarker can differentiate SOZ from non-SOZ interictally and is also a function of interictal epileptiform discharges. We also show a differential level of PAC in slow-wave-sleep relative to NREM1-2 and awake states. Lastly, we show AUROC evaluation of the localization of SOZ is optimal when utilizing beta or alpha phase onto high-gamma or ripple band. The results suggest an elevated PAC may reflect an electrophysiology-based biomarker for abnormal/epileptogenic brain regions.

Abstract Study Objectives Isolated REM sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) carries a high lifetime risk for phenoconversion to a defined neurodegenerative disease (NDD) including Parkinson disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, and multiple system atrophy. We aimed to examine iRBD patient values and preferences regarding prognostic counseling. Methods One hundred thirteen iRBD patient participants enrolled in the Mayo Clinic iRBD Patient Registry were sent an email survey concerning their values and preferences concerning NDD prognostic counseling and their experiences following diagnosis with iRBD. Results Of 81 respondents (71.7% response rate), the majority were men (74.0%) with an average age of 65.7 (±9.7) years. Responses indicated a strong preference toward receiving prognostic information about possible future NDD development. 92.5% of respondents felt knowledge concerning personal NDD risk was important, while 87.6% indicated prognostic discussions were important to maintaining trust in their physician. 95.7% indicated a desire for more information, while only 4.3% desired less information regarding their NDD prognostic risk. Most respondents strongly agreed that prognostic information was important to discuss with their family and friends and inform future life planning, and most expressed interest in learning more about future neuroprotective therapies and symptomatic treatments for parkinsonism and dementia. Conclusions Most iRBD patients indicated strong preferences for disclosure of NDD prognostic risk and indicated that prognostic information was important for family discussions and future life planning. Future broader surveys and qualitative studies of clinic-based and ultimately community dwelling iRBD patients’ values and preferences are needed to guide appropriately tailored and individualized prognostic counseling approaches following iRBD diagnosis.