Comparison of Different Targeting Methods for Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation

  • Ting Guo
  • Kirk W. Finnis
  • Sean C. L. Deoni
  • Andrew G. Parrent
  • Terry M. Peters
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4190)


The subthalamic nucleus (STN) has been adopted as a commonly used surgical target in deep brain stimulation (DBS) procedures for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Many techniques have been developed to facilitate STN DBS targeting, and consequently to improve the surgical outcome. In this work, we conducted a retrospective study on 10 patients who were treated with bilateral STN DBS to assess the target localization accuracy and precision of six methods in STN DBS surgery. A visualization and navigation system integrated with normalized functional and anatomical information was employed to perform the targeting procedures. Actual surgical target location determined by an experienced neurosurgeon with pre-operative image-guided surgical target/trajectory planning and intra-operative electrophysiological exploration and confirmation was considered as the “gold standard” in this evaluation and was compared with those localized using each of the six targeting methods. The mean distance between the actual surgical targets and those planned was 3.0 ± 1.3mm, 3.2 ± 1.1mm, 2.9 ± 1.1mm, 2.7 ± 1.2mm, 2.5 ± 1.0mm, and 1.7 ± 0.8mm for targeting approaches based on T2-weighted magnetic resonance image (MRI), brain atlas, T1 and T2 maps, electrophysiological database, collection of final surgical targets of previous patients, and the combination of these functional and anatomical data respectively. The results demonstrated that the use of functional data along with anatomical data provides reliable and accurate target position for STN DBS.


Deep Brain Stimulation Essential Tremor Subthalamic Nucleus Brain Atlas Target Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Hamani, C., Richter, E., Schwalb, J.M., Lozano, A.M.: Bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation for Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review of the clinical literature. Neurosurgery 56, 1313–1324 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Richter, E.O., Hoque, T., Halliday, W., Lozano, A.M., Saint-Cyr, J.A.: Determining the position and size of the subthalamic nucleus based on magnetic resonance imaging results in patients with advanced Parkinson disease. J. Neurosurgery 100, 541–546 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schaltenbrand, G., Wahren, W.: Atlas for Stereotaxy of the Human Brain. Thieme, Stuttgart (1977)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ganser, K.A., Dickhaus, H., Metzner, R., Wirtz, C.R.: A deformable digital brain atlas system according to Talairach and Tournoux. Med. Imag. Analy. 8, 3–22 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slavin, K.V., Thulborn, K.R., Wess, C., Nersesyan, H.: Direct visualization of the human subthalamic nucleus with 3T MR imaging. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 27(1), 80–84 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deoni, S.C.L., Rutt, B.K., Peters, T.M.: Segmentation of thalamic nuclei using high resolution quantitative magnetic resonance imaging and a modified k-means algorithm. In: Proc. 13th ISMRM, vol. 168 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Finnis, K.W., Starreveld, Y.P., Parrent, A.G., Sadikot, A.F., Peters, T.M.: Three-dimensional database of subcortical electrophysiology for image-guided stereotactic functional neurosurgery. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 22(1), 93–104 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D’Haese, P.F., Cetinkaya, E., Konrad, P.E., Kao, C., Dawant, B.M.: Computer-aided placement of deep brain stimulators: From planning to intraoperative guidance. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 24(11), 1469–1478 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guo, T., Finnis, K.W., Parrent, A.G., Peters, T.M.: Development and application of functional databases for planning deep-brain neurosurgical procedures. In: Duncan, J.S., Gerig, G. (eds.) MICCAI 2005. LNCS, vol. 3749, pp. 835–842. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cuny, E., Guehl, D., Burbaud, P., Gross, C., Dousset, V., Rougier, A.: Lack of agreement between direct magnetic resonance imaging and statistical determination of a subthalamic target: the role of electrophysiological guidance. J. Neurosurg. 97, 591–597 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hamani, C., Richter, E.O., Andrade-Souza, Y., Hutchison, W., Saint-Cyr, J.A., Lozano, A.M.: Correspondence of microelectrode mapping with magnetic resonance imaging for subthalamic nucleus procedures. Surg. Neurol. 63(3), 249–253 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Starreveld, Y.P.: Fast nonlinear registration applied to stereotactic functional neurosurgery. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guo, T., Starreveld, Y.P., Peters, T.M.: Evaluation and validation methods for intersubject non-rigid 3D image registration of the human brain. In: Proc. SPIE Medical Imaging. Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Display, Bellingham, WA, vol. 5744, pp. 594–603. SPIE (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Follett, K.A., Mann, M.D.: Effective stimulation distance for current from macroelectrodes. Exp. Neurol. 92(1), 75–91 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ting Guo
    • 1
    • 3
  • Kirk W. Finnis
    • 4
  • Sean C. L. Deoni
    • 5
  • Andrew G. Parrent
    • 2
  • Terry M. Peters
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Robarts Research Institute 
  2. 2.The London Health Sciences CentreLondonCanada
  3. 3.Biomedical EngineeringUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  4. 4.Atamai IncLondonCanada
  5. 5.Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of PsychiatryKing’s CollegeLondonUK

Personalised recommendations