High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) versus deep brain stimulation (DBS) for refractory tremor: team DBS.
Authors: Rolim FPS, Portela DMMC
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been widely accepted as a powerful tool capable of suppressing tremor by modulating the neuronal circuitry, with long-term adaptability and a profile of low adverse effects. It has been the primary treatment for refractory tremor for decades, with sustained long-term efficacy. Recently, magnetic resonance-guided high-frequency focused ultrasound (HIFU) has emerged as an alternative, prompting comparisons between these approaches. Deep brain stimulation offers long-lasting tremor control in Parkinson's disease (PD) and essential tremor (ET). In addition, it enables us to advance our understanding of brain circuits by integrating neuroimaging, electrophysiology, and connectomics data to map the best stimulation spots. Technologies such as adaptive and directional DBS enable real-time adjustments and greater precision, optimizing results and minimizing adverse effects. Although HIFU shows promising results, it remains an ablative and non-adjustable therapy, contrasting with DBS's dynamic and customizable advances.
Introduction
Purpose
Thermal Ablation
Study Objective
To compare deep brain stimulation and MR-guided high-frequency focused ultrasound for treating tremor, emphasizing DBS's long-term efficacy, adaptability, and technological advantages.
Animal model / Human subject
not specified
Disease model
Parkinson's disease and essential tremor (refractory tremor)
MRI or image guidance method
Magnetic resonance-guided (MRI-guided HIFU)
Targeted brain region(s)
Not Specified
Target coordinates
not specified
Cargo name and characteristics
not provided
Route of administration
not provided
Outcomes and Safety
Summary of Outcomes
Deep brain stimulation provides long-lasting suppression of tremor in Parkinson's disease and essential tremor with adaptable, low-adverse-effect control, while MR-guided high-frequency focused ultrasound is a promising but ablative, non-adjustable alternative; no focused ultrasound parameter variations were tested or reported.
Duration of biological effect
decades
Safety-related matter
The paper states DBS has a profile of low adverse effects and that adaptive/directional DBS can optimize results while minimizing adverse effects. In contrast, HIFU is described as an ablative, non-adjustable therapy, implying less ability to modify treatment-related effects compared with DBS.
Brain Region
Ultrasound Parameters
Ultrasound instrument
not provided
FUS Frequency
not provided
FUS Intensity
not provided
FUS Pressure
not provided
FUS Mode
not provided
Pulse duration
not provided
Duration of a single FUS session
not provided
Focal Characteristics
not provided
Treatment frequency
Both (single and multiple sessions)
We are open to feedback. If you see a mistake or have a suggestion, please contact us.
← Back to Search