Go back
Title: A comparison of Robotic versus Conventional frame based stereotactic lead placement in Parkinson’s Disease
e-poster Number: INSIM65
Category: Neurosurgery
Author Name: Ajay Hegde
Institute: Institute of Neurological Sciences
Co-Author Name: Patricia Littlechild, Michael Canty
Abstract :
Background:
Deep Brain stimulation has emerged as an effective treatment modality movement disorder.
The vast majority of procedures are still performed by conventional frame based stereotactic
methods. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of lead placement of robotic
surgery vs Frame based surgery.
Methods:
A Retrospective evaluation of 24 patients (48 electrodes) who underwent Deep Brain
Stimulation surgery for Parkinson’s disease between January 2017 to April 2021. The Leksell
Stereotactic frame was used for implantations prior to 2019 and the Renishaw neuromate®
robotic system was used for all implantations after 2019. Lead DBS was used for lead
reconstruction and calculation of distance between the contacts and nucleus.
Results:
A total of 48 directional electrodes were implanted in the study period. STN was the target in
20 patients and 4 patients had VIM implantation. The mean age of our group was 60.71±7.3
(47–78 years), with predominantly males, 21:3. All robotic placements were in contact with
the STN, while 72.7% of frame-based electrodes were in the STN (0.016) All electrodes
targeted to the VIM were in contact with the nucleus. The mean distance of the electrode
array from the target nucleus in Leksell insertion was 1.36mm±1.06mm in comparison to
0.78mm±0.71mm in robotic placement. (P=0.014). In a subgroup analysis of STN
placements, mean distance was 1.51±1.13 vs 0.81±0.74 in Leksell and robotic placements.
(P=0.006).
Conclusion:
Robotic placement of electrodes was more precise in STN location in comparison to
conventional frame-based methods.
