Skip to main content
editorial
. 2020 Nov 2;10(1):7–30. doi: 10.1007/s40120-020-00220-5

Table 2.

Overview of randomized clinical trials on deep brain stimulation of the globus pallidus internus

Study Design n Age, years (mean ± SD) Duration of disease, years (mean ± SD) Stage of disease (H&Y scale) Unilateral (U) or bilateral (B)
Burchiel et al. [88] Randomized, blinded pilot study 4 46.5 ± 11 10.6 ± 2 4.0 (4.0–4.8) B
Katayama et al. [89] Double blinded evaluation 7 5U, 2B
Anderson et al. [23] Randomized, blinded, parallel- group study 10 54 ± 12 10.3 ± 2 4–4.5 B
DBS for Parkinson’s Disease Study Group et al. [24] Prospective, double-blinded, randomized crossover trial 38 55.7 ± 9.8 14.5 B
Rodriguez-Oroz et al. [26] Multicenter, double blinded, non-randomized trial 20 55.8 ± 9.4 15.4 ± 6.2 3.0–5.0 B
Follett et al. [25] Multicenter, randomized, blinded trial 152 61.8 ± 8.7 11.5 ± 5.4 3.3 ± 0.9 B
Weaver et al.a[27] RCT 61 62.4 ± 8.8 10.8 ± 5.4  ≥ 2 B
Robertson et al. [90] Randomized double-blinded controlled trial 13 65.5 ± 8.6 15.1 ± 10.2 3.5 ± 0.8 B
Weaver et al. [28] Multicenter RCT 89 60.4 ± 8.3 11.4 ± 4.9 3.3 ± 0.8 B
Okun et al. [29] Prospective, blinded RCT 23 60.2 ± 6.2 12.5 ± 3.6 2.0–5.0 U
Rocchi et al. [91] Randomized 14 61.1 ± 8.4 12.9 ± 10.17 3.5 ± 0.9 B
Odekerken et al. [30] RCT 65 59.1 ± 7.8 10.8 ± 4.2 2.5 (0–4) B
Moro et al. [92] Nonrandomized, multicenter study 16 56.0 ± 2.1 15.1 ± 1.5 3.9 ± 0.2 B
Rothlind et al. [31] Prospective, randomized, controlled study 80 61.3 ± 8.9 11.0 ± 4.7 3.2 ± 0.8 B
Zahodne et al. [87] RCT 22 61.3 ± 5.5 12.4 ± 3.6 U
St George et al. [93] RCT 10 62.8 ± 8.2 15.4 ± 8.4 B
Study Follow-up/study duration (months) UPDRS II changes: MED OFF, DBS ON vs. OFF UPDRS-III changes: MED OFF, DBS ON vs. OFF Change in medication or LEDD (%) Change in dyskinesias (%) Change in quality of life (%) Main findings
Burchiel et al. [88] 12 39% improvement No significant change 47% improvement Schwab and England scale 63% improvement Pallidal and STN stimulation appears to be safe and efficacious for management of advanced PD
Katayama et al. [89] 8  57% improvement No significant change Stimulation ON vs. OFF resulted in 57% improvement in UPDRS for GPi
Anderson et al. [23] 12 18% improvement 39% improvement No significant change 89% improvement Stimulation of either GPi or STN improves many features of advanced PD
DBS for Parkinson’s Disease Study Group et al. [24] 6 35.8% improvement 33.3% improvement No significant change 36% improvement Bilateral stimulation of the STN or GPi is associated with significant improvement in symptoms of PD
Rodriguez-Oroz et al. [26] 36–48 7.6% improvement 39% improvement No significant change 72% duration reduction, 76% severity reduction Long-term efficacy of either STN or GPi stimulation shows a significant and substantial clinically important therapeutic benefit for at least 3–4 years in a large cohort of severe PD patients
Follett et al. [25] 24 17.3% improvement 28.2% improvement 17.9% decrease 38.6% improvement 11.2% improvement Similar improvement in PD symptoms with either pallidal or subthalamic stimulation
Weaver et al.a[27] 6 24.1% improvement 28.9% improvement 23.1% decrease 37% improvement 17.1% improvement DBS is more effective than best medical therapy
Robertson et al. [90] 6 32.1% improvement DBS in GPi did not significantly worsen jaw velocity 6 months after surgery
Weaver et al. [28] 36 8.6% improvement 34.1% improvement 17.8% decrease 51.7% improvement 6.4% improvement Improvement of motor symptoms of PD by DBS remains stable over 3 years and does not differ by surgical target
Okun et al. [29] 7 26.6% improvement No significant changes in mood and cognition between STN and GPi in optimal DBS state. GPi and STN have similar motor improvement
Rocchi et al. [91] 6 32.2% improvement 16.0% decrease DBS at 6 months can impair step initiation
Odekerken et al. [30] 12 21.8% improvement 26.0% improvement 15.6% decrease 16.7% improvement Schwab and England scale 20% improvement No difference in outcomes between STN and GPi, but suggestion that STN may be preferred target
Moro et al. [92] 60–72 25.8% improvement 35.1% improvement No significant change 75% improvement Confirmation of effectiveness of GPi and STN stimulation long term (5–6 years), with preoperative reponse to L-DOPA predicting long-term benefit with both targets
Rothlind et al. [31] 6 80.3 ± 105.3 PDQ-39 total scorea In patients with PD, likelihood of neuropsychological decline increases with DBS
Zahodne et al. [87] 6 28.0% improvement 8.4% increase 38.1% improvement Quality of life overall improved, with improvement reported to be greater in GPi than STN
St George et al. [93] 6 27.9% improvement 20.5% decrease DBS did not improve compensatory step response needed to recover from balance perturbations in the GPi group

DBS Deep brain stimulation, H&Y Hoehn and Yahr, LEDD levodopa equivalent daily dose, MED OFF, off-medication, PD Parkinson’s disease, PQD-39 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, RCT randomized controlled trial, SD standard deviation, STN subthalamic nucleus, UPDRS Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale

aCombined GPi and STN result