No abstract

Advancing conventional open‐loop DBS as a therapy for PD is crucial for overcoming important issues such as the delicate balance between beneficial and adverse effects and limited battery longevity that are currently associated with treatment. Closed‐loop or adaptive DBS aims to overcome these limitations by real‐time adjustment of stimulation parameters based on continuous feedback input signals that are representative of the patient's clinical state. The focus of this update is to discuss the most recent developments regarding potential input signals and possible stimulation parameter modulation for adaptive DBS in PD. Potential input signals for adaptive DBS include basal ganglia local field potentials, cortical recordings (electrocorticography), wearable sensors, and eHealth and mHealth devices. Furthermore, adaptive DBS can be applied with different approaches of stimulation parameter modulation, the feasibility of which can be adapted depending on specific PD phenotypes. Implementation of technological developments like machine learning show potential in the design of such approaches; however, energy consumption deserves further attention. Furthermore, we discuss future considerations regarding the clinical implementation of adaptive DBS in PD. © 2018 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Postoperative assessment of GBM volume seems to offer high intraobserver agreement, but low interobserver agreement. Using absolute RTV values to relate extent of tumor resection with survival may be unreliable. More research is needed before this method can be used as a valid end point for clinical studies. Computer-assisted tumor volume calculation may increase interobserver agreement in the future.

Despite the use of first-choice anti-epileptic drugs and satisfactory seizure outcome rates after resective epilepsy surgery, a considerable percentage of patients do not become seizure free. ANT-DBS may provide for an alternative treatment option in these patients. This literature review discusses the rationale, mechanism of action, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ANT-DBS in drug-resistant epilepsy patients. A review using systematic methods of the available literature was performed using relevant databases including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library pertaining to the different aspects ANT-DBS. ANT-DBS for drug-resistant epilepsy is a safe, effective and well-tolerated therapy, where a special emphasis must be given to monitoring and neuropsychological assessment of both depression and memory function. Three patterns of seizure control by ANT-DBS are recognized, of which a delayed stimulation effect may account for an improved long-term response rate. ANT-DBS remotely modulates neuronal network excitability through overriding pathological electrical activity, decrease neuronal cell loss, through immune response inhibition or modulation of neuronal energy metabolism. ANT-DBS is an efficacious treatment modality, even when curative procedures or lesser invasive neuromodulative techniques failed. When compared to VNS, ANT-DBS shows slightly superior treatment response, which urges for direct comparative trials. Based on the available evidence ANT-DBS and VNS therapies are currently both superior compared to non-invasive neuromodulation techniques such as t-VNS and rTMS. Additional in-vivo research is necessary in order to gain more insight into the mechanism of action of ANT-DBS in localization-related epilepsy which will allow for treatment optimization. Randomized clinical studies in search of the optimal target in well-defined epilepsy patient populations, will ultimately allow for optimal patient stratification when applying DBS for drug-resistant patients with epilepsy.